NFCSP Testimony

Good afternoon Senator Landis and members of the Revenue Committee. My name is Jackie Ridder, spelled R-I-D-D-E-R, and I am appearing both as a parent of children educated in West Point Catholic schools and as the President of the Nebraska Federation of Catholic School Parents, a statewide organization of more than 15,000 parents committed to school choice. The NFCSP strives to keep Catholic school parents informed of legislative activity pertaining to education issues of interest, and encourages its members to be active participants in the public policy process. On behalf of the NFCSP, I wish to thank Senator Friend for introducing LB 769, and we heartily support this bill.

Our position on school choice is not unlike that of the Nebraska Legislature. We believe that parents and legal guardians have the primary responsibility of ensuring that their children receive the best education possible. That statement is part of our organizational philosophy, and it is also codified in state law [Section 79-232] as the legislative findings relative to the option enrollment program. In recognition of this responsibility, the legislature permits parents to consider several factors in deciding which public school is best for their children, such as the size of the schools in the area, the distance children have to travel, the course offerings and extracurricular offerings, and the quantity and quality of the staff.

We have considered and evaluated these same factors and decided that the best school for our children is a Catholic school. The main difference between the option enrollment program and the choice we made is the fact that, by virtue of our choice, we have incurred substantial out-of-pocket costs not incurred by parents optioning into a public school.

If history is any guide, opponents of this bill will remind you that we made a choice to go outside of the public school system, and that we knowingly and willingly incurred the extra costs resulting from that decision. This is true. And, quite frankly, I would think you state senators would be thankful that we did make that decision. Based upon the average cost per pupil in the public schools, currently in excess of $7,700 per pupil, the parents who enroll 40,000 children in nonpublic schools save state and local taxpayers more than $300 Million in public education costs each year. Please keep that in mind when reviewing the fiscal impact statement that accompanies this bill.

Some might argue that the students in nonpublic schools could be absorbed into the public schools with minimal cost increases. That may be true in a few select communities. However, consider just three communities. There are more than 17,000 students in nonpublic schools in the Omaha metro area, and we have all read in the newspapers how OPS is looking to expand its boundaries to acquire additional resources to educate the children already in its system. In Lincoln, there are more than 6,600 students in nonpublic schools that would have to be absorbed into a public school system currently educating about 32,000 students and proposing a bond issue to renovate and expand its facilities. Finally, in my home-town of West Point, there are 420 students in West Point Catholic schools and about 690 in West Point Public Schools. Do you think West Point Public could go from 690 students to over 1,100 without incurring additional costs? Twenty-five percent of the school-aged children in Cuming County are educated in nonpublic schools, Catholic and Lutheran.

Nebraska, like all states, has a compulsory education law, and provides in that law that attendance at a private, denominational or parochial school satisfies the compulsory education requirements. In addition, private, denominational and parochial schools are extensively regulated by the state through approval and accreditation rules and regulations adopted by the Nebraska Department of Education. This state-imposed regulatory framework covers everything from the qualifications of the personnel the school may hire, the number and types of courses the school must offer, the number of new library books that must be purchased each year, and the number of periodicals that the school must subscribe to each year. Recently, the State Board of Education adopted a rule imposing additional obligations relative to school preparedness for emergency asthma attacks and severe allergic reactions. These regulations govern staff training and medical supply requirements. We are not opposed to being prepared for emergency medical situations. I just want to bring to your attention the extent to which our schools are regulated just like a public school, and the fact that these regulations result in costs that must be passed onto the parents sending their children to the school.

Finally, one last point I would like to make regarding the fiscal impact of this bill. Keep in mind that the fiscal impact to the state is only 8 percent or less of the total economic activity involved. Under the bill, parents are limited to claiming a tax credit of 8 percent of certain out-of-pocket educational expenses. That means that whatever the fiscal impact of the credit is, the parents claiming the credit infused 12.5 times that amount into the Nebraska economy. When we pay tuition, the money doesn’t disappear into a dark hole. It gets turned around almost immediately in the form of salaries for teachers, payments to utility companies, groceries for the lunch program, and additional supplies required for the operation of any school, public or private.

We believe that LB 769 is good public policy. It makes sense from an economic standpoint, and it is a logical, practical and constitutional extension of the option enrollment concept to parents who opt for private and parochial schools. As the United States Supreme Court stated more than 20 years ago in upholding as constitutional a similar tax deduction enacted in Minnesota:

THE CONFERENCE: