The following is a transcription of the Senate Debate on SB268, from the audio file of the Senate Session on March 22, 2006, starting at 1:43:00 and ending at 2:27:12. The vote was 17-7 to accept the recommendation of the Senate Finance Committee, Ought to Pass with Amendment. The roll-call vote of the Senators is as follows:
|
Gallus |
Yes |
|
Johnson |
Yes |
|
Kenney |
Yes |
|
Boyce |
No |
|
Burling |
Yes |
|
Green |
Yes |
|
Flanders |
No |
|
Odell |
Yes |
|
Roberge |
Yes |
|
Eaton |
No |
|
Bragdon |
No |
|
Gottesman |
Yes |
|
Foster |
Yes |
|
Clegg |
Yes |
|
Larsen |
Yes |
|
Barnes |
No |
|
Martel |
Yes |
|
Letourneau |
No |
|
D’Allesandro |
Yes |
|
Estabrook |
Yes |
|
Morse |
No |
|
Hassen |
Yes |
|
Clark |
Yes |
|
Gatsus |
Yes |
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/senateaudio/sessions/2006-03-22am.asx
1:43:00
Senate President Gatsas:
What we will do is, everybody can get pizza, we’ll continue working through, we’ll eat at our desks so that we can continue moving some bills, ‘cause I think there are some Senators that need to leave early, so we want to make sure we can get through this agenda in a timely way.
Senate President Gatsas:
The Senate will be attendant to the Clerk.
Senate Clerk:
Thank you, Mr. President. The committee on Finance, to which was referred Senate Bill 268, an act raising the age of required attendance of children in school, having considered the same, the committee recommends the bill ought to pass with an amendment, by a vote of 6-2. Senator Green for the committee.
1:43:39
Senate President Gatsas:
Senator Green.
Senator Green:
Make sure I got the right bill… 268? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. President. I move that Senate Bill 268 ought to pass with amendment. The current statutes provide that education must be provided until a high school diploma has been received, or the pupil is 21, whichever comes first, and I’m referring to RSA 189:1 (a). Senate Bill 268 would require that children attend school until age 18. While certain students will be determined not to finish school, there are others that will stay in school, if they are accommodated. That’s what this legislation does.
The amendment passed by the Finance Committee establishes a pilot program in Nashua and Manchester, to identify students that are interested in vocational education programs, and appropriates $600,000. Nashua and Manchester have been identified because they already have alternative education programs in place.
As the pool of dropouts continues to grow, employment opportunities for them are more limited, because today’s economy requires of the labor force increased literacy, more education, enhanced technical skills, and certainly life-long learning.
Please join me in helping to reduce the dropout rate by requiring students to stay in school until age 18. Please support the committee recommendation of Ought To Pass With Amendment. Thank you.
1:45:11
Senate President Gatsas:
The bill is now in second reading. The first order of business is the committee amendment. Is there any discussion of the committee amendment? Senator D’Allesandro.
Senator D’Allesandro:
Thank you, Mr. President. I rise in support of the bill as amended. I think it’s a good example of, again, bipartisan support with regard to a piece of legislation that makes a great deal of sense given what’s going on in our economy, and given what’s going on in the world today. We recognize the fact that traditional schools are not the right thing for everyone, and in the bill, alternate programming is suggested; I think that’s vital.
Having been a teacher, a high school teacher, a college teacher, I understand the merits of the legislation, and certainly understand the merits of the amendment. In looking at programs that are already established, it may be driving off of those programs, so that other alternatives can be made available to those students who are in our state, so it’s a good piece of legislation, it’s a piece of legislation whose time has come. We’re not an agrarian society any longer, we don’t have the mills in Manchester, where kids would be dropping out of school in order go to work at a textile mill or a shoe factory. All of that’s changed. Education is vital, and this is a reaction to that situation.
So I think it’s a good piece of legislation, and something that we should be proud of.
Thank you, Mr. President.
1:46:32
Senate President Gatsas:
Senator Barnes for a question.
Senator Barnes:
Question of you, Mr. President. Sorry I missed the front end of this, I was out getting lunch. If I vote for what we’re gonna discuss now, am I voting to have children stay in school, or does this have something to do with the alternative program? What am I voting for, alternative programs, which I’m firmly in favor of, or keeping kids in school who don’t want to be there disrupting the rest of the classroom, which I’ll vote against? Just tell me what I’m voting for.
Senate President Gatsas:
Senator, right now we’re voting on the committee amendment.
Senator Barnes:
What does the committee amendment say, if you could…
Senate President Gatsas:
Senator D’Allesandro, do you want to address the committee amendment?
Senator D’Allesandro:
I’d like to, Mr. President, thank you very much. What the committee amendment does, Senator Barnes, is it appropriates $600,000 to support these alternative programs that are in existence, in Manchester and Nashua. The alternative programs also encompass the surrounding communities.
Senate President Gatsas:
Follow-up question.
Senator Barnes:
Thank you Senator D’Allesandro [unintelligible] brings us back to the mix. However, voting for this, I want to vote for the alternative deal, but I can’t do it the way you have it because the Part 1 of this bill keeps those kids in school who are disrupting the students. They’re the ones that the teachers call me and ask me, “Don’t vote for it Senator, we don’t want those people [angry] disrupting our classrooms.” So I can vote for alternative, I believe in it, you have a great program in Nashua for those kids to be able to be at, but I cannot vote for keeping kids in school that shouldn’t be there, that are disrupting the classroom and using people’s tax dollars to mess things up.
1:48:22
Senator D’Allesandro:
If I might address that…
Senate President Gatsas:
Senator D’Allesandro for the committee.
Senator D’Allesandro:
Senator Barnes, if you read the text of the bill, what the bill provides for is alternatives for those students, so that the disruptive student, who for some reason can’t remain in a traditional environment, has an opportunity to create a program and move outside of that environment. And you’re voting for the amendment because what the amendment does is it provides some funding for those non-traditional environments. And if you don’t like it, [kindly, but firmly] don’t vote for it.
1:48:54
Senator Barnes:
Mister President, is this divisible?
Senate President Gatsas:
[chuckles]
Senator Barnes:
I want to divide it, because I want to vote for the alternative, but I don’t want to vote for the rest of it, I think it’s wrong.
Senator D’Allesandro:
Thank you.
Senate President Gatsas:
Senator Boyce. Excuse me, excuse me, Senator Fuller-Clark for a question, I apologize.
Senator Fuller-Clark:
Thank you very much. Senator D’Allesandro? I’d just like to…
Senator D’Allesandro:
[chuckles] I thought I was going to get Barnes… OK…
Senator Fuller-Clark:
Is it not true, or could you make it clear that, if a student wished to pursue, for instance, their GED, outside of the traditional classroom, can they do that, as opposed to having to remain in a regular full-day curriculum?
Senator D’Allesandro:
Thank you for the question, Senator Clark. Yes, again, the text of the bill provides for these alternatives, it has a process by which these alternatives can be accomplished.
1:49:58
Senate President Gatsas:
Senator Bragdon for a question.
Senator Bragdon:
Thank you, Mr. President. Senator D’Allesandro, my good friend, and lover of civics, isn’t it true that a student can drop out now, and still take a GED? Does this do anything for a student who wants to take a GED? Can’t he do it now?
Senator D’Allesandro:
A student can now drop out and take the GED exam when they’re 16, that’s correct. What this does is embellishes that opportunity, in terms of providing the opportunity to get educated beyond 16 in an environment that they choose, which I think is a wonderful opportunity, rather than what’s available now.
1:50:40
Senate President Gatsas:
Senator Boyce.
Senator Boyce:
Thank you, Mr. President. I rise sort of in opposition to the committee amendment, more in opposition to the underlying bill. I will be bringing forward a floor amendment after this vote that will do exactly what Senator Barnes has suggested. I will put the cart in front of the horse instead of, the horse in front of the cart instead of, as I believe this bill is now the cart before the horse.
The idea of giving kids an incentive to stay in the school I think is a good idea, and that’s why I’m basically in favor of the committee amendment. I’m in favor of giving kids a reason to stay. However, if we pass the underlying part of the bill that says they have to stay, regardless of whether they want to, I think that there will be some unintended consequences. Some kids will decide that, well, I don’t have a choice, I do have a choice, I’m gonna go to Boston, I’m gonna go to New York, I’m gonna live on the streets. It may cause some kids to leave. Whereas otherwise they might stay, and work at some menial job for a year, and they find out that that, “Gosh, I don’t like menial jobs, I want something better; to get something better, I’ve got to go back and get that GED.” That’s what happens now. Kids leave the system, they don’t automatically leave the state. But I think that if we pass this, they don’t want that truant officer coming after them, coming knocking on the door, and saying, “Why aren’t you in school?” They’re gonna leave. They’re gonna go away.
We need to set up the programs first. We need to set up the programs to keep the kids here, then, if it looks like they’re all staying in school until they’re 18, the other part of the bill won’t be needed anyway. But to say to all the kids in the school between 16 and 18, unless you live in Manchester or Nashua, or I guess maybe Portsmouth, enhh, we don’t necessarily have anything to help you out, but you gotta stay there anyway. I’ve been in those classrooms, I’ve listened to kids that were 15 years and 9 months old saying they can’t wait ‘till the day they turn 16 ‘cause they’re dropping out, whether or not their parents let them, I don’t know, but that’s what they said. And it is disruptive to be in a classroom with kids who don’t want to be there and there’s not really much you can offer them, because there’s not outside opportunities in most school systems. It’s nice that Manchester and Nashua and Portsmouth have some alternatives available. Some other schools may have come up with some attractive alternatives to help, but to simply say, “OK, we’re gonna change the age requirement today, and maybe if this pilot program works in a couple of years, we may have something that we can offer the kids in the other school systems,” I think we’re doing it backwards.
So, I would… whether or not this amendment passes or fails, I am intending to bring out a floor amendment which will take out the age requirement change, and simply leave in the new program part of it that the Senate Finance Committee sought to put in there.
Thank you.
1:54:08
Senate President Gatsas:
Senator Estabrook.
Senator Estabrook:
Thank you Mr. President. I rise in support of the bill. Everyone knows that I’ve been on board since the beginning ‘cause I think it’s all about helping kids succeed.
I’d like to put something that’s been said here today to rest. This bill is not about keeping kids in school who don’t want to be in school. There is no way, shape, or form this bill is about that. Neither Senator Green nor myself would ever support such a concept. As a former teacher I know very well that it’s counterproductive to keep kids in school when they don’t want to be there.
However, what the bill does say, it doesn’t say they have to stay in school. What the bill says is that they have to have a plan, so that somewhere down the road they will achieve their GED or their high school diploma. If they want to take one course next semester at night and go work, fine, but they’re going to have a plan that leads to eventual success. And if we come across the occasional student, as we will, who cannot create such a plan, there is the “best interests of the child” exemption. So we are not forcing students to stay in school with this bill. We are forcing them to build a future for themselves, and more importantly, even, I think, we are forcing schools to meet their needs.
I’ve spent most of, not most of, then a good deal of time on Monday, visiting the Dover Adult Learning Center, speaking to a combined class of adult basic education students and a teen class there. And it was really quite an enlightenment. Most of what they wanted to talk about was this bill. And most of them thought this bill was a great idea. I heard from students there who walked away from school at 16, and the school never even contacted them. Doesn’t even know that they’re not there -- keeps marking them absent! I talked to a 43-year-old man who wishes that at the time he dropped out of school this legislation had been in place and somebody had shown him a path to success. Now he’s back getting his GED.
Sure, you can go get your GED under the current statute if you want to drop out. But no one is encouraging you to do that. This bill encourages students to succeed. It doesn’t put them in little boxes, it doesn’t tie them to their seats, it asks the schools to step up to the plate, gets the guidance counselor, the principal, the parents and the student together and figure out what will work for this student. What’s wrong with that?
This is a bill we should be supporting. It will help our constituents, and it will help the state down the road. Thank you, Mr. President.
1:57:04
Senate President Gatsas:
Senator Martel.
Senator Martel:
Thank you, Mr. President. I also rise in support of this legislation. I’m proud to be a co-sponsor of it.
We in Manchester, and also in Nashua, but primarily in Manchester [unintelligible], have the tremendous privilege of having a school especially for children who have a difficult time being educated in the normal environment of the regular school system. They may be troublesome, they may be slow, they may be not interested, they may be talkative, but when they go to this school, under the rigors of the curriculum that‘s there and everything that’s offered to these students to have, all the different courses they can take, we have the privilege of seeing their eyes glimmer with enthusiasm when we went to visit the Tech Center in Manchester Memorial High School. It was incredible. We were allowed to be in the room; there were 5 of us there, including the governor, the senate president, majority leader, and also two other senators besides myself, who saw, and were able to ask questions directly of these students, asking them whether or not they would ever consider going back to regular school, and most of them who were asked that question boldly stood up and answered, said, “No, we are really enjoying what we’re doing here, and we’re able to get something so that we can utilize it in our future. And proudly so, we are here.” The teachers barely participated in the discussion, that’s what I loved, they were not under the pressure of teachers, and all that –
But the other thing is that I had the opportunity first hand to witness this program, with one of my children. One of my children went through 3 years of high school, and decided that he had had enough. After taking a year off, we were able to convince him, with the help of the super- , not the superintendent, but the man in charge of – Jim Schubert – who’s in charge of the education system over there in the Tech School, to convince him to come back to the school, and to participate in the programs that were being offered to him, like others. And my son kind of balked at first, but then he came, and he was involved. He graduated at the age of 20. Didn’t matter to him; he was proud that he finished. He’s proud that he was able to accomplish something, a sense of accomplishment he now carries in the military. And, he was able to do it with honors, like many of these other students. We need to continue to have institutions like this available to these students, who cannot get through school for various reasons. It’s a great system, and I fully support it.
Thank you very much, Mr. President.
2:01:04
Senate President Gatsas:
Senator Larsen.
Senator Larsen:
I kind of lost track of the fact that we’re simply debating the amendment, but the amendment, I rise to support. It, in fact, does what people had hoped the dropout bill would do, which is it establishes alternative programs in a way to see how those alternative programs work. I wished that it included communities other than Manchester and Nashua because there are alternative programs in other parts of the state, but by passing this amendment, we are offering kids in Hooksett, Auburn, Candia, Londonderry, Goffstown, Pelham, Hudson, Amherst, Milford and Hollis another choice, for a way, an alternative school that might work for them.
I think it makes sense to pass this amendment. I hope that through proving that these pilot programs work, that when the bill takes effect, we have some experience that we will be able to use that will show that in fact it does help kids get through what we know is the essential step of graduating from college – from high school.
2:02:19
Senate President Gatsas:
The question is on the adoption of the committee amendment. Are you ready for the question?
All in favor sss…do we have a…[thump] we will have a two-second recess until we get everybody in from the…we have a quorum, I’m not concerned, I just want to make sure they understand the vote…We have thirteen…
[break]
Senate President Gatsas:
…on the adoption of the committee amendment. Are you ready for the question? All in favor say, “Aye”. [Aye - many] Opposed, “No.” [No – a couple] The “ayes” have it; the committee amendment is adopted.
The bill is on second reading. Is there any further discussion or committee amendments?
Senator Bragdon.
2:03:08
Senator Bragdon:
Thank you Mr. President. I would like to rise in opposition to Senate Bill 268, and I guess before I state why, I need to really commend the governor and all those involved for recognizing the problem that we have in the state of New Hampshire with the dropout rate, and I certainly don’t want my opposition to this bill to take any attention away from the need to continue addressing this problem.
That being said, I think we’ve had some tremendous success in the last five years when the dropout rate in NH has dropped by a third, and it’s through efforts like the alternative programs being discussed right now that has helped that to happen. I serve on a school board, this is my 10th year, we have an excellent alternative program that’s worked very well for our students, and I’m a former high school teacher, so I’m certainly very familiar with the situations we have.
My opposition to this bill is based on my feeling that this bill will be ineffective in reducing the dropout rate and ineffective in increasing the graduation rate. In reality, what we want to be dealing with is not the dropout rate, we don’t really want to keep people from dropping out more so than we want to get them to graduate. And there’s a big difference between those two; just because someone stays around for another couple of classes doesn’t mean that they graduate, and that’s my big concern. I fully support giving kids a reason to stay in school, but I even more so support the need to get them that high school diploma, which opens the door for their future.
I think there’s probably two specific areas that cause me concern. First, I think that we’re aiming in the wrong direction here. The primary difference between the bill that we have before us now and current law is how it affects those who are younger than 18, because currently, if you’re 18, you can just stop coming. Under this bill, if it passes, if you’re 18, you just stop coming. So what we’re really focusing on is those kids who decide they’re going to drop out at age 16. That’s the target. Looking at some of the numbers, by my estimation, 93% of the dropouts in NH drop out after the age 16. We are focusing our attention not at the core part of the problem. 93% drop out after the age of 16, by the numbers I’ve seen. So let me repeat then, a vast majority, a vast majority of those who drop out in NH do so after they reach the age of 18, and this bill has no effect on them.
So, one, I think we’re aiming at the wrong target, and two, I think the data shows that increasing the dropout age is not an effective way to increase the graduation rate. ‘Cause the goal, again, is to graduate, not to avoid dropping out. We’ve done no one any favors if they end up dropping out at age 18 without a high school diploma. Some data to support that – according to the US Department of Education, states with high dropout ages are only half as likely to have high graduation rates. Again, a higher dropout age, half as likely to have high graduation rates, and three times more likely to have low graduation rates. It seems ironic, that by raising the dropout age we actually can decrease the graduation rate. An analysis done at Cornell University in 1996 both Kansas and Texas increased their dropout ages from 16 to 18, in both states four years later, the graduation rate was lower than it was when they started. In fact, across the nation, there was a very slight decrease in the graduation rate; in these two states the decrease was 10 times more than it was as a national average. In the conclusion of the Cornell analysis, there seems to be no significantly positive effect of raising the dropout age from 16 to 18, and there may actually be a negative impact.
I think we’re currently spending around $25 million across the state on dropout prevention programs. I think we need to focus those on areas that are proven to be effective, and not pursue a concept that seems to have the opposite effect.
I know that if we pass this we can go and we can tell our constituents that we’ve done something to solve the dropout problem; I don’t think we have. In talking with teachers and superintendents and principals, I think they all acknowledge there are times when we just need to let this happen. And again, the data shows that the higher the dropout rate the lower the graduation rate, and I think what we all want to see is the graduation rate increase.
Thank you, Mr. President.
2:07:34
Senate President Gatsas:
Senator Gottesman.
Senator Gottesman:
Thank you, Mr. President. In all due respect to Senator Bragdon, we must be talking to different teachers, because the teachers tell me that they want those kids to have expectations when they’re 12 and 13 years old, so that when they get toward 14, 15, they’re not thinking about the day after they’re 16 and pulling out of school. That is our obligation, to give them the best opportunity that they can have to complete a full education. I’m not familiar with the statistics and you know, I appreciate Senator Bragdon’s detail, but I think we are a unique place with a unique opportunity that has been used in other states that has worked.
We recently had a visit by a dignitary from another state who told us about how it was successful in that state, and, you know, we think that this is something – and I’m proud to be a co-sponsor of this bill – we think this is something that will make a change, and make a statement to our youth that will allow them to move forward with some positive reinforcement that we as a community feel that this is very, very important.
Thank you, Mr. President.
2:08:49
Senate President Gatsas:
Senator Bragdon for a question.
Senator Bragdon:
Mr…Senator Gottesman, Senator Gottesman, I appreciate your concern and agreement with me that we need to be focusing our attention at ages 12 and 13. What does this bill do for those who are 12 and 13?
Senator Gottesman:
Well, it makes it a statement, that they’re not going to be able to be thinking about leaving school at 16 like their parents did, or like their uncles did, or like their older brothers and sisters did. It allows them to start thinking about the fact that they have an obligation to themselves, and that we have expectations of them that will allow them to get to a higher level of education, make them competitive on a global market that we’re all concerned about, and hopefully give them the confidence to continue either in regular school or in one of these alternative programs.
2:09:37
Senate President Gatsas:
Senator Flanders.
Senator Flanders:
At this time, I withdraw.
Senate President Gatsas:
Senator Hassen.
Senator Hassen:
Thank you, Mr. President. I rise in support of the bill, and I do so because I think some of our debates about this issue misses the mark. We have a compulsory attendance age right now of 16. It was set in 1903. If there are people in this chamber who do not believe there should be any compulsory age for completion of one’s education, for staying in school, then they should vote against this bill, and they should urge the repeal altogether of the 16-year-old compulsory attendance limit. But the fact is, that limit was set in 1903, when one could support themselves in agriculture or manufacturing at age 16, and when that was an appropriate age limit given our economy. Our economy today demands a workforce that has graduated from high school, and it is true that our 18-year-olds and all our adults will not be able to participate fully in this economy without a high school diploma.
I spent some time in the Exeter school district, where we have alternative programs and adult education programs, a regional vocational program, with teenagers and young adults, some of whom have dropped out of school. And Governor Lynch was with me at the time. These students and their teachers asked us repeatedly about special circumstances where it might be appropriate for somebody under 18 to take some time away from school and then come back to it, and as we explained the bill to them, they expressed their support for it, understanding that what it did was create a partnership between schools and young people to ensure that young people get the high school education that they need to be competitive in today’s global economy.
To say that this will somehow keep disruptive students in their seats and will greatly disrupt schools, I think misconstrues the bill, which addresses possible disruptions, and also ignores the fact that people do not become magically disruptive at age 16. We are already dealing with students who have different learning styles, different needs. This bill just supports us continuing to do that, to the point where they can get a high school education and be truly competitive, and full citizens in today’s economy and democracy.
Thank you, Mr. President.
2:12:00
Senate President Gatsas:
Senator D’Allesandro.
Senator D’Allesandro:
Thank you Mister President . I’d just like to address a few things that my colleague, Senator Bragdon said, because we’re both school board members. I spent 10 years on the Manchester school board, and know that he’s an outstanding member of the Milford school board, so I commend you for that. And I think your point about level of expectations and graduation rate is really what we should focus on. We should be encouraging students to graduate, graduate and get their diploma, and I think we do that, really, from the beginning. You know, civic involvement begins in kindergarten; it doesn’t begin in the 9th, 10th or 11th grade; it really begins at home, transfers to kindergarten, and then goes through. And by having that sentiment, and that mentality in place, I think the encouragement begins there. And if a student is having difficulty in what we would call the traditional environment, it’s then that these alternatives are being proposed. And this is after consultation with members of the school, and I think the parents get involved in that, too.
But sure, we’re talking about graduation rates, and we’re giving more kids an opportunity to do some things that they feel good about, and feel good about themselves, because they must feel good about themselves if they’re going to achieve.
And I, too, have been to other high schools. There’s a work-study program at Goffstown High School, where they put the kids out into the community. In Manchester we have the PASS program, which is a fine alternative program. We just need more of these, and you’re exactly right, emphasizing the graduation rate is our ultimate goal, to have 100% of those students who enter graduate. That may not be, you know, achievable, but it’s a lofty goal, and it’s a goal that we should strive for.
Thank you, Mr. President.
2:13:53
Senate President Gatsas:
Senator Barnes for a question.
Senator Barnes:
Thank you, Mr. President. Senator D’Allesandro, there’s a program out there that I haven’t heard mentioned today, maybe you could enlighten the body on it, because you probably know a lot more about it than I do, because of all the years you’ve served on the board in Manchester. It’s headed up by former Senator Bobby Stevens, and it’s called the JAG program, and those of you who follow the trail on St. Patrick’s Day know that he, every year, for the last number of years, has a get-together, and the money goes to the JAG program. I’ve been deeply involved with it in the town of Raymond, when I was on the school board – very involved with it – so perhaps you could enlighten us about the JAG program, ‘cause I think that’s a program that sort of fits in with what we have here, and I’d appreciate it if you could enlighten the rest of the group.
Senator D’Allesandro:
Thank you for the question, Senator Barnes. By the way, the New England Board of Higher Education recently honored the program, Jobs for NH Graduates, at our annual dinner in Boston, as an outstanding contribution to education. The program provides scholarship money and alternative programming for students who have left high school. And we had a wonderful representation from a young woman at Bobby Stevens’s get-together telling how this incentive got her to go on and finish her high school education, get the diploma, and then go on to college. So it’s a great alternative program, and it’s a very good model for people to follow.
Senator Barnes:
Thank you, Senator.
Senator D’Allesandro:
You’re welcome, Senator Barnes.
2:15:30
Senate President Gatsas:
Senator Boyce.
Senator Boyce:
Thank you. I [unintelligible] floor amendment [unintelligible] passed out
Senate President Gatsas:
[unintelligible] 1498
Senator Boyce:
…and this is essentially the committee’s amendment. All I’ve done is make it so that it replaces all of the bill, and so it’s an opportunity to establish the pilot program, allowing the schools to go forward and attract kids to stay in school until graduation. It gives them, it gives these schools some money to fund the pilot programs, and it allows us to take a couple years and look at how we can actually increase the graduation rate, and then if that’s still not working, we can then come back and look at other possible ways to do this. But as I said before, I think we’ve got the cart before the horse the way this bill was out of committee. So this is the same language that’s in the committee amendment, but it simply strips the rest of the bill. So it gives $600,000 as an appropriation to be used for a vocational education programs in Manchester and Nashua, pilot program, two years to see if they can attract kids to stay in school ‘till graduation. And this is what Senator Barnes was asking for, I believe, and I hope that I can get some votes on this to pass it along, and I won’t take long time discussing it. Thank you.
2:17:15
Senate President Gatsas:
Amendment 1498 has been proposed. Is there any discussion? Senator Green.
Senator Green:
Thank you, Mr. President. Senate Bill 268 as it is currently before you, as it came out of the Finance Committee, has its structure in place so that the school districts themselves have the same motivation that we have, which is to keep these children in school, and have them graduate. I believe that the schools, themselves, with these comments I’ve heard today about they don’t want kids in the classroom, left in the classroom, I agree with that. [exasperated] The incentive is to find a way to get them out of the classroom, and get them into a constructive program that they in turn can stay in the educational system and get their diploma. That’s what this bill is all about. This amendment does not do that. This amendment simply says that we’re going to appropriate $600,000 for two pilot programs, and we’re going to leave the age at 16, and we’re not going to worry about those kids from ages 16 to 18. They want to stay, fine, they don’t want to stay, fine, we’re not going to do anything, we’re not going to worry about them. I think that we want to, as legislators, see that these children get an education. I think we want to make sure the schools work hard to place children in other alternative programs. [exasperated] If you look at the bill, and you look at the second page of the bill – actually the first page is the actual language – under the alternatives, “alternative learning shall include age-appropriate academic rigor and flexibility to incorporate the pupil’s interests and manner of learning”. That’s about their own educational plan. “These programs may include, but are not limited to, such components or combination of components of extended learning opportunities as independent study,” – you don’t need to be in a classroom to do independent study – “private instruction,” – you don’t have to be in the classroom to get private instruction – “performing groups,” – you don’t have to be in the classroom to be part of a performing group – “internships,” – you don’t have to be in the classroom to do an internship, “community service,” – you don’t have to be in the classroom to do that – “apprenticeships,” -- you don’t have to be in the classroom to do that, you work with the business community, you may even be making money, if it’s a work-study program – and you know what, we’ll even go along with “on-line courses.” Again, it’s gonna require that we pay attention to these young people, and that we in turn expect the schools to track ‘em, and develop a plan for them to continue their education. Now that’s what this is about, this is not about keeping children sitting in a classroom disrupting the classroom, because I would not support that, I never have. But it is an opportunity for us to say to ourselves and to our students and to our parents and to our children that, look, [emphasizing] we think education is important, and it’s critical. This amendment strips that whole concept right out of here. So I would rise in opposition to the amendment, and ask that we support the bill as originally amended as it came out of the committee. Thank you.
2:20:55
Senate President Gatsas:
Senator Flanders.
Senator Flanders:
[unintelligible] for the bill, but I’ve listened here for a little over an hour, and there’s one word that I haven’t heard, and I think I should have heard, and that’s “parents”. And I
Senator Estabrook:
[background] I heard the word, “parents”.
Senator Flanders:
[unintelligible] the bill does say that if we’re going to do alternative programs the parents are gonna have a say in this, because that was most of the calls that I got.
Senate President Gatsas:
Question, Senator? That was a question?
Senator Flanders:
If I can just very briefly…My question is, and I don’t know who’s going to answer this one, but when I was on the school board, way back when developed Conval School, the nine-town school, we spent a great deal of money with the vocational program, all part of the school-age program; they built a house every year, and they sold it, and I think that’s what we’re heading back to, and I think we’ve got to be ready for this if we’re going to pass this type of legislation, we’ve got to go back to that. That’s -- and then all those phased out. I don’t know if Senator D’Allesandro or Senator Bragdon is gonna tell me why we did away with all of this – I think I know the answer, but my question is, that’s where we were, that’s what we tried to do 30 years ago, and I think we’re right back to where we were 30 years ago. Thank you.
2:21:59
Senate President Gatsas:
Senator Estabrook to answer the question.
Senator Estabrook:
Thank you, Mr. President. I do remember my remarks mentioning the parents, the parents are definitely an essential ingredient in developing the plan, and their inclusion is, in fact, in the bill, on page 2, Section 2, at the top, “at least one parent or guardian of the pupil is to be involved in the process of developing the alternative plan.” I brought in legislation years ago on parental involvement in schools. It’s very clear to me and all of the sponsors that the parents need to be involved, and that’s why we made sure it’s in the bill. Thank you.
2:22:39
Senate President Gatsas:
Senator Fuller-Clark.
Senator Fuller-Clark:
Thank you very much, Mr. President. I rise in opposition to the amendment that is before us. I believe that it is critical that we create a broad framework that makes a statement from this legislative body, about the significance and importance of education through your high school years. And what this bill would – what this amendment would – do, is it would remove those principles, remove that statement, remove the structure within which students are now going to be provided with a variety of alternatives to move forward. I, frankly, would be embarrassed to have this legislature vote against this bill, because of the significant message and statement that we make in the beginning of the twenty-first century, and I’m talking about the total bill, in terms of knowing that education is the key for opportunity and success in the future, and that it’s a high school diploma, and a high school experience that is gonna make it possible. All of the tools are in place now to give these students a support system under the framework of this legislation to help them move forward and get that diploma. And if we do not pass this legislation, it’s like we’re saying to the rest of the public out there, and to our students and to that generation that it’s OK to drop out at 16. It is not OK to drop out at 16, and all of us know that. So I urge you to defeat this amendment, and move forward with the legislation, because it creates that framework where we can give students a greater opportunity to experience success and move forward and be contributing members of our society.
2:24:44
Senate President Gatsas:
The question is on the floor amendment 1498s. Are you ready for the question? All in favor of the floor amendment say, “Aye.” [Aye, numerous votes]. Opposed, “No.” [No, even more numerous] The no’s have it. The floor amendment failed.
The bill is still in second reading, and, I hate to say this, open for further discussion and amendment.
The question is on the adoption of Ought To Pass as Amended on Senate Bill 268. Are you ready for the question?
Unknown:
…roll call..
Senate Clerk:
[speaking to self]
Senator Gallus.
Senator Gallus:
Yes.
Senate Clerk:
Senator Johnson.
Senator Johnson:
Yes.
Senate Clerk:
Senator Kenney.
Senator Kenney:
Yes.
Senate Clerk:
Senator Boyce.
Senator Boyce:
No.
Senate Clerk:
Senator Burling.
Senator Burling:
Yes [emphatic].
Senate Clerk:
Senator Green.
Senator Green:
Yes.
Senate Clerk:
Senator Flanders.
Senator Flanders:
No [firm].
Senate Clerk:
Senator Odell
Senator Odell:
Yes [crisply].
Senate Clerk:
Senator Roberge.
Senator Roberge:
Yes.
Senate Clerk:
Senator Eaton.
Senator Eaton:
No[clipped].
Senate Clerk:
Senator Bragdon.
Senator Bragdon:
Nope [clipped].
Senate Clerk:
Senator Gottesman.
Senator Gottesman:
Yes.
Senate Clerk:
Senator Foster.
Senator Foster:
Yes.
Senate Clerk:
Senator Clegg.
Senator Clegg:
Yes.
Senate Clerk:
Senator Larsen
Senator Larsen:
Yes.
Senate Clerk:
Senator Barnes.
Senator Barnes:
No.
Senate Clerk:
Senator Martel.
Senator Martel:
Yes.
Senate Clerk:
Senator Letourneau.
Senator Letourneau:
No.
Senate Clerk:
Senator D’Allesandro.
Senator D’Allesandro:
Yes,
Senate Clerk:
Senator Estabrook.
Senator Estabrook:
Yes [enthusiastic].
Senate Clerk:
Senator Morse.
Senator Morse:
No.
Senate Clerk:
Senator Hassen.
Senator Hassen.
Yes.
Senate Clerk:
Senator Fuller-Clark.
Senator Fuller-Clark:
Yes.
Senate Clerk:
Senator Gatsus.
Senator Gatsus:
Yes.
Senate Clerk:
[quietly] 17 to 7.
Senate President Gatsus:
The ayes have it, 17 to 7, the motion of Ought To Pass as Amended is adopted and ordered to third reading.
2:27:12