logo
For Alaska legislators, it's try, try, try again on big public education funding effort

For Alaska legislators, it's try, try, try again on big public education funding effort

Yahoo01-05-2025
Members of the Alaska House of Representatives look at the voting board for House Bill 57 on Wednesday, April 30, 2025. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)
For the third time in two years, the Alaska Legislature has approved a bill that seeks to increase long-term state funding for the state's K-12 public schools.
On Wednesday, the state Senate voted 17-3 and the House voted 31-8 to approve House Bill 57, which would permanently increase the base student allocation, core of the state's per-student funding formula, by $700 per student, or $183 million across the state per year.
The bill also makes some policy changes for charter schools, creates a grant program to encourage schools to improve students' reading performance, and establishes an education task force to recommend further changes.
'I can't express how much gratitude that I know all of Alaska is sending with the message that we've sent,' said Rep. Alyse Galvin, I-Anchorage, after the House passed the bill.
'Everybody wants something for children, and to see what we've seen, people working together … I think that was achieved and we found a little something for everyone.'
Wednesday's votes send the bill to Gov. Mike Dunleavy, who vetoed two previous bills that attempted to increase the BSA.
The governor did not have an immediate comment on the Legislature's action. Dunleavy, on a trip to Washington, D.C., was unavailable for questions by phone, a spokesperson said.
While the Legislature failed to override the governor's two previous vetoes, the result of a third override could be different, legislators said.
'It's one of the most sweeping sets of policy reforms for education, I think, in state history,' said Rep. Zack Fields, D-Anchorage and the original author of HB 57. 'And I think that's why you see such unity between the chambers and from every caucus. And that kind of unity is unprecedented.'
Since the start of April, the governor has urged the Legislature to include policy changes for charter schools, an open enrollment policy between schools and districts, an extra funding boost for homeschooled students, and grants for school districts whose students meet reading standards.
In talks over the weekend, the Republican minority caucuses in both House and Senate negotiated some of those provisions into HB 57. That was enough to sway some Republicans who voted against prior school funding measures, such as the recently vetoed House Bill 69.
'That's the process; you do the best that you can, and this is a much better bill than HB 69,' said House Minority Leader Mia Costello, R-Anchorage. She voted against House Bill 69, but in favor of HB 57.
'Vetoing HB 69 set the stage for being listened to by the majority. When we stuck together on that veto, we were basically sending a message that there were other things that needed to happen,' Costello said.
'While nobody is perfectly fine with the outcome of this bill, it makes it a step in the right direction, and we couldn't have gotten there if we hadn't held firm on that.'
In an unusual move, the governor's education commissioner sent a letter to school district superintendents on Monday, asking them to lobby the Legislature in favor of the governor's proposals.
Within the letter, she said that if the Legislature failed to meet the governor's demands, he could end up vetoing money used to pay for the updated formula.
In the end, some of the governor's requests were included, but others — including an extra funding boost for homeschooled students — were not.
Last year, lawmakers approved $174 million in one-time bonus funding on top of the BSA, so the formula change would not significantly increase year-over-year funding. Instead, the change's main advantage is that it allows school districts to plan ahead when budgeting, instead of waiting to see what the Legislature approves each year.
'Having the stability of the funding in the formula is critically important,' Fields said.
Without the change, school districts have to act as if there will be no funding bonus, a possibility until the state budget is finalized. That means warning teachers of possible layoffs, then rehiring them when money is approved.
'Having (the BSA increase) in policy avoids this destructive policy of pink slips and replacement,' Fields said.
At the start of the year, school districts said they needed a BSA increase of more than $1,800 to keep up with inflation since 2011. The final version of HB 57 is a little over a third of that figure, and some lawmakers called it a good first step.
'Fairbanks schools are suffering right now. Our schools have been starving for well over a decade. It's absolutely critical that we invest right now. This funding is stabilizing our school district and districts across the state, and it was a no-brainer,' said Rep. Ashley Carrick, D-Fairbanks.
But not everyone was pleased with the final result — of the Legislature's 60 members, 11 Republicans voted against the bill, and one, Rep. David Nelson, R-Anchorage, was excused absent.
Rep. Cathy Tilton, R-Wasilla, said she was unhappy with the final versions of policy proposals inserted into the bill. The reading grants won't become effective unless a bill updating corporate taxes becomes law. Open-enrollment provisions, which would allow students to transfer between schools and districts, were referred to a task force and not included in the bill.
'I just felt like the policy positions that were taken in the bill were not strong policy positions,' she said.
Rep. Kevin McCabe, R-Big Lake, also voted against the bill.
'I don't think it's enough. I think we need to focus on our kids,' he said.
Electoral factors may have been in play for Wednesday's vote.
In a column published by the conservative website Must Read Alaska, Bob Griffin of the Alaska Policy Forum opined that if the legislative session were to end without an education bill, the 'outcome wouldn't just harm our kids, it would also complicate Republican messaging in the next election, particularly with swing voters drawn to simplistic narratives.'
Before Wednesday's House vote, the Alaska Senate needed to fix errors revealed after it approved HB 57 on Monday.
There were two errors, lawmakers said. One involved the use of 'shall' instead of 'may' in a funding clause, raising concerns that it could run afoul of the Alaska Constitution's prohibition on budget accounts for particular programs.
The second involved a mistake on the effective date of a program that distributes grants to schools whose students reach certain benchmarks for reading skills. Those grants would begin with the 2026-2027 school year, not in January, halfway through the 2025-2026 school year.
The Senate had voted 19-1 in favor of HB 57, but its vote on Wednesday was 17-3.
The change was largely due to the way the new reading grant program is linked to passage of Senate Bill 113, a bill that updates corporate tax law pertaining to internet sales.
That change is expected to raise as much as $65 million per year, and proceeds would be directed toward the reading grant program.
If there's more than enough money to fund that program, the extra cash would be available for career and technical education programs in high schools.
'That's going to be huge, I think,' said Sen. Bert Stedman, R-Sitka.
Amid a state budget crunch, education 'is the only area in the state where we're increasing spending,' he said.
But some senators noted that if SB 113 doesn't become law, the reading grants won't just be defunded — they'll be eliminated entirely.
'We are conditioning not only the funding of the reading grants … but the existence of the reading grants on another bill or policy,' said Sen. Robert Myers, R-North Pole.
For that reason, he said, he was unable to vote for the bill.
'I do find it a little odd that we guarantee a ride to school, but we don't have that guarantee that we're going to incentivize the growth of reading,' he said.
Senate Minority Leader Mike Shower, R-Wasilla, voted in favor of the bill on Monday but changed his vote on Wednesday, saying he wasn't aware that the reading grants were contingent on the revenue bill.
'I'm kind of on a hope and a prayer that those things happen. … That makes it problematic for me,' he said.
Sen. Shelley Hughes, R-Palmer, also voted in favor of the bill on Monday and against it on Wednesday for the same reason.
After Wednesday afternoon's final vote, a House majority spokesperson said he expects HB 57 to be transmitted to Dunleavy on Thursday.
When the bill is sent, the governor will have until May 17 to sign the bill, veto it, or allow it to become law without his signature.
If he vetoes it, the Alaska Constitution calls for the Legislature to meet 'immediately' for a vote to override or sustain the governor's decision. Forty of 60 legislators, meeting in joint session, would have to vote for the bill in order to override a veto.
Legislators have not overridden a veto since 2009.
Alaska Beacon reporter Corinne Smith contributed to this article from Juneau.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

US deadlines in Ukraine are a gift to Putin and Xi
US deadlines in Ukraine are a gift to Putin and Xi

The Hill

time2 hours ago

  • The Hill

US deadlines in Ukraine are a gift to Putin and Xi

President Trump's announcement this week of a shortened window of '10 to 12 days' for Russian President Vladimir Putin to reach a ceasefire agreement in Ukraine reflects a continued evolution in his rhetoric. His growing frustration with Moscow and his willingness to speak plainly about Russia's escalation send a signal that many in the U.S. and Europe have been waiting to hear. But while the shift in tone signals growing frustration, it has not translated into action. Russia reads the action as a continued pause in pressure, which it has used to intensify its offensive against Ukrainian homes and hospitals. Russian forces are now making their fastest territorial gains in more than a year, and their attacks are becoming more sophisticated. Swarm tactics using Iranian-designed Shahed drones, now mass-produced and adapted inside Russia with Chinese parts, are overwhelming Ukraine's air defenses at an alarming rate. In just one day last month, Russia launched 728 drones, decoys and missiles in a single coordinated wave. Ukrainian interceptors and radar crews are doing heroic work, but they are stretched to the limit. The U.S. has tools at its disposal that remain unused. For months, a bipartisan sanctions bill, co-authored by Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and backed by 85 senators, a veto-proof majority, has been ready to move. The legislation would impose steep secondary tariffs on countries like China, India and Brazil that continue to buy Russian oil and gas, and would significantly raise the cost of doing business with Moscow. But in July, Senate leadership pulled the bill from consideration after President Trump suggested he would act if Russia failed to move toward peace within 50 days. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) said he would 'hold off' on advancing the bill, signaling that Congress would defer to Trump's timeline. House leaders followed suit. That decision was a mistake. While it is encouraging to see President Trump express increasing resolve, deferring congressional action in the hope that Putin will suddenly negotiate has only given Moscow more time and space to escalate. Every week of delay is a missed opportunity to tighten the financial pressure on Putin's war machine. And the clock is not just ticking in Ukraine. The broader contest involves China, too. Beijing's role in this war has become increasingly visible. Chinese companies are supplying entire weapons systems, not just components. Chinese-made drones and decoys are helping Russia saturate Ukrainian airspace. Chinese officials have even welcomed delegations from occupied Ukrainian territories and continue to sell heavy machinery to companies operating there. European officials report that China's foreign minister recently told the EU that Beijing does not want Russia to lose the war and fears that a Russian defeat would allow the U.S. to focus more squarely on Asia. Ukraine has responded accordingly. In early July, Kyiv arrested two Chinese nationals on espionage charges after they allegedly attempted to steal information about Ukraine's Neptune missile program. Days earlier, President Volodymyr Zelensky imposed sanctions on five Chinese firms accused of supporting the Russian war effort. These are not symbolic gestures, they are signs that Ukraine is increasingly realistic about the stakes and about China's alignment with Moscow. Support for Ukraine is not a distraction from U.S. competition with China. It is a critical part of it. Weakening Putin's military capacity weakens a key pillar of China's global strategy. And allowing Russia to continue its aggression without consequence would embolden Beijing's worst instincts from the Taiwan Strait to the South China Sea. To its credit, the Trump administration has begun voicing stronger concerns about Beijing's role. In the recently concluded round of trade talks, senior U.S. officials reportedly raised objections to China's purchase of sanctioned Russian oil and its sale of more than $15 billion worth of dual-use technology to Moscow. These are important warnings — but without follow-through, they risk being absorbed into the pattern of delay that Moscow and Beijing are already exploiting. The Graham-Blumenthal sanctions bill should move forward. It represents the most serious effort yet to impose real costs not only on Russia, but on the network of countries (especially China) helping it survive sanctions. It complements, rather than competes with, the administration's efforts to pressure Moscow. And it sends a message that the U.S. is serious about backing up its warnings with action. Countdowns can be useful. They create urgency. But urgency without follow-through is no substitute for strategy. What matters now is not how many days remain on the clock, but whether we are using each one to act. Jane Harman is a former nine-term congresswoman from California and former ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, who most recently served as chair of the Commission on the National Defense Strategy. She is the author of 'Insanity Defense: Why Our Failure to Confront Hard National Security Problems Makes Us Less Safe.'

Texas state House panel advances gerrymandered congressional map
Texas state House panel advances gerrymandered congressional map

Boston Globe

time2 hours ago

  • Boston Globe

Texas state House panel advances gerrymandered congressional map

Advertisement But in the end, Republicans on the committee voted to deliver the map that had been called for by President Donald Trump, who said last month that he hoped to get five more Republicans in the House. Republicans currently hold 25 of Texas' 38 congressional seats. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Todd Hunter, a Republican state representative of Corpus Christi who sponsored the legislation for the map, said the new lines had been drawn 'for partisan purposes,' not based on race, and that the resulting map was 'completely transparent, and it's lawful.' The map now must be considered in a committee on calendars, which was set to meet Sunday. A first vote by the full Texas House could come as early as Monday or Tuesday. The state Senate must also approve the new map, or propose its own. Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, has indicated support for redistricting, though he has not commented on the new map, which he can sign into law or veto. Advertisement Texas Democrats could prevent the House from approving the map by failing to show up, denying the quorum needed for any legislative action. But doing so comes with political and practical risks: Republican leaders in the Texas House fast-tracked the redistricting legislation before introducing any bills responding to the deadly floods in the Texas Hill Country -- putting Democrats in the position of potentially walking out on legislation that addresses needs caused by the flooding. And the Texas House adopted rules that call for fines of $500 per day for any member who is absent without approval, a measure adopted after Democratic members broke quorum during a 2021 legislative fight over voting and redistricting. Nationally, Republicans have looked at redistricting in Texas -- and potentially in other states where the party has control of the government, such as Missouri and Indiana -- as a means to preserve a slim Republican majority in the U.S. House after next year's midterm elections, which have historically gone against the party holding the presidency. In response, Democratic leaders in California, Illinois and New York have said they were considering redrawing their states' maps to create additional seats for Democrats to win, and offset any Republican gains in Texas. Last month, Democratic members of the Texas House traveled to California and Illinois to meet with Gov. Gavin Newsom and Gov. JB Pritzker and discuss those possibilities. Ken Martin, chair of the Democratic National Committee, said Saturday that his party was ready to fight this change. 'If Republicans want a showdown, the DNC, Texas Democrats and Democrats across the country have one thing to say: We will give you a showdown,' he said. Advertisement This article originally appeared in

Texas pushes redistricting into an era of ‘maximum warfare'
Texas pushes redistricting into an era of ‘maximum warfare'

Boston Globe

time3 hours ago

  • Boston Globe

Texas pushes redistricting into an era of ‘maximum warfare'

'The Texas Republicans are taking us on a race to the bottom,' said Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat who lamented in an interview that his party must reluctantly participate in 'this rotten system.' Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Voters are the immediate casualty in this escalating arms race, reduced almost to bystanders as Republicans essentially admit to trying to determine the outcome of Texas races long before elections are held. Advertisement The result is a democracy determined less by public opinion than by raw political might. Trump has pressed Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas and Republican state legislators to redraw their lines, with a draft map released Wednesday that all but erased three urban Democratic seats and forced two other incumbents in South Texas into more Republican terrain. The special legislative session Abbott called lasts until late August, but votes could come in the coming week. Advertisement And Texas could be just the beginning. Trump and his allies are pressing other states to follow suit and remake their maps with more Republican seats. States under complete GOP control that could be targeted for redistricting include Missouri, Florida, Indiana, New Hampshire and Ohio. 'We're going to get another three or four or five, in addition,' Trump told reporters recently of new Republican House seats. 'Texas would be the biggest one, and that'll be five.' The gerrymandering is deeply consequential at a time when a single House race can cost tens of millions of dollars. Republicans won control of the House in 2024 by only three seats, a margin the remapping in Texas alone would more than double. One person close to the president, who insisted on anonymity to describe the White House's political strategy candidly, summed it up succinctly: 'Maximum warfare, everywhere, all the time.' The redistricting push is only one element. Trump has targeted Democratic law firms with executive actions. He has threatened prosecutions of and ordered investigations into his political enemies, while the Justice Department has dropped lawsuits aimed at protecting voting rights. And his congressional allies are investigating ActBlue, the organization that processes an overwhelming share of online donations for Democrats. When it comes to redistricting, Democrats are threatening to fight back. Democratic legislators in Texas are contemplating a potential walkout to deny Republicans the quorum they need to pass the new maps. Lawsuits are being readied. Rep. Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the House Democratic leader, traveled to Texas on Thursday to rally opposition to what he called a 'scheme to rig the midterm elections,' and said all options were on the table. Advertisement Democratic governors in several states, including California and New York, are contemplating rewriting laws or amending state constitutions to remake their maps in response to what is happening in Texas. 'California's moral high ground means nothing if we're powerless because of it,' Gov. Gavin Newsom said after meeting with Texas Democrats who traveled to Sacramento in late July. Newsom is proposing that the Legislature put new maps up for a public vote in a special referendum this fall, without ripping up the state's independent mapmaking commission for 2030. His plan is far along enough that polling is being conducted to see how such a measure would fare. Eric Holder, who was attorney general in the Obama administration, has been a vocal opponent of gerrymandering for years as chair of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, pressing blue states to adopt nonpartisan commissions and fighting red state gerrymanders. But after Texas put out its maps this past week, Holder had a change of heart, calling for a 'temporary' embrace of gerrymandering to thwart Trump. He said he came to this new position after consulting other party leaders, including former President Barack Obama. A failure to respond in kind to GOP gerrymandering, Holder said, could leave Trump with 'unchecked power' in the last two years of his term, with potentially disastrous results. 'It's like the Germans have invaded France,' Holder said. 'Are you going to just say, 'Well, we're against war and we're for the resolution of disputes in a peaceful way'? Sometimes you have to take up arms.' Others reached that point long ago. Marc Elias, one of the Democratic Party's most prominent lawyers, welcomed any converts to his brand of brass-knuckle politics. Advertisement 'I do not believe, when it comes to elections, that Democrats should ever engage in any process that requires Republicans to act in good faith,' Elias said in an interview. Lines are typically redrawn once a decade after the census. Gerrymanders in the middle of a decade have been exceedingly rare, and seen as a nuclear option. But the precision that sophisticated software now grants to map-drawing reduces the chances that new lines backfire on the party in control. Trump would have carried every new Republican-leaning seat carved out in the new maps by nearly 60% in 2024. And no existing Republican-leaning districts were watered down beyond that 60% threshold. Raskin called the modern targeting technology a 'computer-assisted system' for cheating -- 'where the minority power gets gerrymandered into oblivion.' 'Redistricting is going from, like, a decennial bare-knuckle rugby match to an every-other-year 'Hunger Games,'' he said. Democrats have certainly benefited from partisan gerrymanders before. In Nevada, Democrats won three of the state's four congressional seats last year even as Trump carried the state. The Democratic-drawn map in Illinois gives the party 14 House seats, and Republicans three, though Trump won more than 43% of the vote there last year. Today, Republicans are racing to consider even more audacious gambits. In Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis has talked about giving fast-growing red states like his additional seats in Congress in the middle of the decade with a census 'redo,' a political and practical long shot that is legally dubious. 'If Texas can do it, the Free State of Florida can do it 10X better,' Rep. Jimmy Patronis, R-Fla., wrote on the social platform X. In a statement, Patronis said booming population growth made new lines 'only fair.' Advertisement In his first term, Trump tried but failed to exclude people living in the United States illegally from the census, which determines the apportionment of congressional seats. Now, a close ally, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., has announced legislation that would order such a citizens-only census -- and would force districts to be redrawn everywhere. The accelerating use of the most no-holds-barred tactics risks undoing decades of efforts to rein in the most egregious, explicitly partisan gerrymandering -- reforms that were often spurred by voters themselves. After the 2020 census, the maps in four states -- California, Michigan, Colorado and Arizona -- were redrawn by independent commissions enacted by referendums. All four now are led by Democratic governors who face pressure to undo those reforms. And the willingness to battle Republicans is a key factor in who emerges as a presidential contender in 2028. Other experts worry about the warfare spilling over into statehouses. While gerrymanders by red and blue states might roughly offset each other, no such safeguard exists in state legislatures, where the majority parties in many states have created permanent minorities in lower chambers. 'That backsliding would be terrible for progress at a local level,' warned Sam Wang, a professor at Princeton University who leads the school's Gerrymandering Project. Historians have warned that both parties risk broader unrest if they gerrymander vast sections of the country so effectively that they neuter opposition at the ballot box, leaving voters without a real choice. Yet politicians sometimes openly acknowledge that this is their aim. As Rep. Richard Hudson of North Carolina, chair of the House Republican campaign arm, put it recently on CNN: 'Any seats that we gain before Election Day would be nice.' Advertisement This article originally appeared in

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store