2016 Legislative Candidates Survey Results, Monroe County
The following are responses from a Survey Monkey completed by these legislative candidates*:
Bill Breeden, (D) Indiana House, District 46, running against incumbent Bob Heaton (R)
Steve Lindsey, (D) Indiana House, District 62, Running against incumbent Jeff Ellington (R)
Linda Hendersen, (D) Indiana State Senate 65, running against Eric Koch (R) and Darren Kinser (L)
Penny Githens, (D) Indiana House District 60, running against incumbent Peggy Mayfield (R)
Matt Pierce, (D) Indiana House District 61, currently not up for reelection
*Note that Matt Pierce is not up for re-election in 2016
Why are the Republican incumbents notably absent from this survey?
ICPE-Monroe County is a nonpartisan organization advocating for the support for public education.
In recent years, public education has been under attack particularly under a Republican governor and Republican super majority in Indiana's state legislature who have passed laws defunding our schools and increasing high-stakes testing. The underlying desire of the people who write these bills (see ALEC—The American Legislative Exchange Council—and its influence on our education policy here or look at their website for the model legislation that reflects our glowing example for here) is to create a marketplace for education. This marketplace or privatization of public schools is undermining our democracy, dismantling healthy public schools systems, hurting the teaching profession and, ultimately, threatening our children's future and that of our country.
We invited all candidates in contested races whose districts contain a part of Monroe County to fill out our survey. Only the Democrats filled it out. Republicans, notably the incumbent Republicans, refused to do so. They also refused to participate in our legislative forum on education held on September 19th. While we know that there are a few remaining Republicans who have voted against their party's majority on public education bills—most notably, Vaneta Becker of Evansville—it is has increasingly become a straight party line issue.
We expect our state legislators (and governor, for that matter) to show up. We expect that, given the fact that they represent all of their constituencies, they will explain to us why they have voted on these harmful bills. And yet, repeatedly, we invite these legislators to attend our forums and respond to surveys,and they refuse. Democracy requires a polite discourse--an engagement of citizens to find common ground. These representatives of the people are refusing to be part of the conversation in Monroe County and yet their votes at the statehouse have a serious impact on our lives.
We hope citizens in Monroe County as well as the rest of Indiana will take this into account when they go into that voting booth.
ICPE-Monroe County is a nonpartisan organization advocating for the support for public education.
In recent years, public education has been under attack particularly under a Republican governor and Republican super majority in Indiana's state legislature who have passed laws defunding our schools and increasing high-stakes testing. The underlying desire of the people who write these bills (see ALEC—The American Legislative Exchange Council—and its influence on our education policy here or look at their website for the model legislation that reflects our glowing example for here) is to create a marketplace for education. This marketplace or privatization of public schools is undermining our democracy, dismantling healthy public schools systems, hurting the teaching profession and, ultimately, threatening our children's future and that of our country.
We invited all candidates in contested races whose districts contain a part of Monroe County to fill out our survey. Only the Democrats filled it out. Republicans, notably the incumbent Republicans, refused to do so. They also refused to participate in our legislative forum on education held on September 19th. While we know that there are a few remaining Republicans who have voted against their party's majority on public education bills—most notably, Vaneta Becker of Evansville—it is has increasingly become a straight party line issue.
We expect our state legislators (and governor, for that matter) to show up. We expect that, given the fact that they represent all of their constituencies, they will explain to us why they have voted on these harmful bills. And yet, repeatedly, we invite these legislators to attend our forums and respond to surveys,and they refuse. Democracy requires a polite discourse--an engagement of citizens to find common ground. These representatives of the people are refusing to be part of the conversation in Monroe County and yet their votes at the statehouse have a serious impact on our lives.
We hope citizens in Monroe County as well as the rest of Indiana will take this into account when they go into that voting booth.
Questions:
- Do you believe our public schools are adequately funded? Why or why not?
- How do you believe the introduction of vouchers and expansion of charters have impacted public schools?
- Do you support public funding of private schools through “choice scholarships”/vouchers? If you favor vouchers, do you see any need to limit the funding for them? Please explain.
- What should be the oversight of institutions approving or denying charter school applications, and should those institutions include private religious colleges? Please explain.
- What authority or input should the local community have in approving a charter school or affecting change in the school as they would with a publicly elected school board?
- How should the charter school program in Indiana be evaluated?
- Do you support the use of A to F grading of schools based on student test scores? Please explain.
- For over 100 years, Indiana’s superintendent of public instruction served as chair of the State Board of Education. The Indiana legislature decided in 2015 that the chair of the State Board of Education should be selected from appointees on the State Board instead of being the elected state superintendent. Do you agree with this decision? Why or why not?
Responses
1. Do you believe our public schools are adequately funded? Why or why not?
Bill Breeden
No they are not adequately funded. One of the reasons is that we are funding the vouchers which drain funds from public schools. We need a line item in the budget for vouchers so we know the amount being drained.
Steve Lindsey
No-The State has taken funding away from public schools with their voucher program.
Linda Hendersen
No. Believe money has been diverted away from public education. For example - Dollars that should be dedicated to public education are going to private entities. School funding formula needs to reexamined. Believe rural schools are at a particular disadvantage.
Penny Githens
Absolutely not. If they were adequately funded, school districts like MCCSC would not need to hold a referendum to ensure funding for interventionists, librarians, and art and music teachers. We also are not adequately funding public schools if teachers are not receiving even cost-of-living adjustments. And, the low salaries and increased work demands being places on teachers had led to (a) fewer college students enrolling in teacher education programs, and (b) one in five new teachers leaving the profession after one year. All of this needs to be addressed. We could provide better funding if we spent less money (and time) on unnecessary testing. We need to determine what level of funding is truly needed for schools, then work to find the tax dollars to make that possible.
Matt Pierce
No, schools are not adequately funded. The truth is former Governor Mitch Daniels reset the baseline for school funding and it has never recovered from those cuts. The current budget allows for funds to be diverted from public schools to private school vouchers and charter schools. The school funding formula leaves many school corporations short of needed funding, particularly rural schools. This is why the MCCSC funding referendum is necessary.
Bill Breeden
No they are not adequately funded. One of the reasons is that we are funding the vouchers which drain funds from public schools. We need a line item in the budget for vouchers so we know the amount being drained.
Steve Lindsey
No-The State has taken funding away from public schools with their voucher program.
Linda Hendersen
No. Believe money has been diverted away from public education. For example - Dollars that should be dedicated to public education are going to private entities. School funding formula needs to reexamined. Believe rural schools are at a particular disadvantage.
Penny Githens
Absolutely not. If they were adequately funded, school districts like MCCSC would not need to hold a referendum to ensure funding for interventionists, librarians, and art and music teachers. We also are not adequately funding public schools if teachers are not receiving even cost-of-living adjustments. And, the low salaries and increased work demands being places on teachers had led to (a) fewer college students enrolling in teacher education programs, and (b) one in five new teachers leaving the profession after one year. All of this needs to be addressed. We could provide better funding if we spent less money (and time) on unnecessary testing. We need to determine what level of funding is truly needed for schools, then work to find the tax dollars to make that possible.
Matt Pierce
No, schools are not adequately funded. The truth is former Governor Mitch Daniels reset the baseline for school funding and it has never recovered from those cuts. The current budget allows for funds to be diverted from public schools to private school vouchers and charter schools. The school funding formula leaves many school corporations short of needed funding, particularly rural schools. This is why the MCCSC funding referendum is necessary.
2. How do you believe the introduction of vouchers and expansion of charters have impacted public schools?
Bill Breeden
Yes, negatively!
Steve Lindsey
They have hurt our public schools by taking away funding that was already too lean. Public schools are now having to cut programs which in turn is causing larger class sizes.
Linda Hendersen
Believe this has impacted public schools in a negative way. Would advocate a halt to expansion and evaluate the impact of vouchers/charters upon public education.
Penny Githens
First, the introduction of charters and vouchers has made public schools more segregated, with special education students and those with fewer family resources left in public schools. According to the Indiana Coalition for Public Education, this past year vouchers cost the state an additional $53M. In part that's because parents who previously either home-schooled their children, paid for private schools on their own, or whose children received scholarships from private schools, are now receiving tax-payer funded vouchers. Let's keep in mind that 90% of vouchers are going to pay for religious-based schooling. In the past, congregations that sponsored schools banded together to provide scholarships to those in need, meaning the church help to fund the school. With decreases in church attendance, we need to be looking into whether or not religious-based schools are now helping to fund churches. Since public money is financing these schools, I believe we have a right to audit how the money is being spent. I am also against the expansion of charters. Private entities, such as Grace College, have a financial incentive to grant charters since they receive 3% of the tuition. Yet we, as tax-payers, have no way of overseeing how this money is being used. Furthermore, the Washington (state) Supreme Court has ruled that charters are unconstitutional because their boards are not elected. And, the National Labor Relations Board recently ruled in two separate cases that as far as federal law is concerned, charter schools are not public schools but private corporations. Again it is a situation where the boards are not publicly elected or accountable to public officials. It's sad that every time a charter school opens, money is taken away from public schools, schools that are overseen by publicly-elected boards. Indiana has put into place a system where the money follows the child. This has made planning within public schools especially difficult as students can now leave in the middle of the year. How is anyone supposed to properly plan for the number of teachers to hire and the number of school buildings to keep open? Furthermore, this system has led to public schools competing for students, a system I deplore. If programming like an elementary-level STEM or bi-lingual school is good, then let's look to provide that in as many places as possible. If a given school district cannot offer a given program and a student wants to transfer to another school district, I believe only part of the money should follow the child. Charter and public schools also rob the public of oversight of the curriculum. Charters and vouchers have arisen for a variety of reasons, but I think we should address the underlying reasons rather than make teachers and schools scape-goats for student outcomes. We need to capture what is good about certain charter and private schools and introduce them into our public school system. Instead of all the fighting, we should get back to educating future generations.
Matt Pierce
Vouchers and unlimited expansion of charter schools is undermining public education by siphoning funds away from public schools. In many cases these schools are doing no better or worse than public schools when it comes to academic achievement. If these policies are left unchecked, the state will ultimately have a two-tier system of education with public schools struggling to educate students with the greatest learning challenges that private and charter schools refuse to accept.
Bill Breeden
Yes, negatively!
Steve Lindsey
They have hurt our public schools by taking away funding that was already too lean. Public schools are now having to cut programs which in turn is causing larger class sizes.
Linda Hendersen
Believe this has impacted public schools in a negative way. Would advocate a halt to expansion and evaluate the impact of vouchers/charters upon public education.
Penny Githens
First, the introduction of charters and vouchers has made public schools more segregated, with special education students and those with fewer family resources left in public schools. According to the Indiana Coalition for Public Education, this past year vouchers cost the state an additional $53M. In part that's because parents who previously either home-schooled their children, paid for private schools on their own, or whose children received scholarships from private schools, are now receiving tax-payer funded vouchers. Let's keep in mind that 90% of vouchers are going to pay for religious-based schooling. In the past, congregations that sponsored schools banded together to provide scholarships to those in need, meaning the church help to fund the school. With decreases in church attendance, we need to be looking into whether or not religious-based schools are now helping to fund churches. Since public money is financing these schools, I believe we have a right to audit how the money is being spent. I am also against the expansion of charters. Private entities, such as Grace College, have a financial incentive to grant charters since they receive 3% of the tuition. Yet we, as tax-payers, have no way of overseeing how this money is being used. Furthermore, the Washington (state) Supreme Court has ruled that charters are unconstitutional because their boards are not elected. And, the National Labor Relations Board recently ruled in two separate cases that as far as federal law is concerned, charter schools are not public schools but private corporations. Again it is a situation where the boards are not publicly elected or accountable to public officials. It's sad that every time a charter school opens, money is taken away from public schools, schools that are overseen by publicly-elected boards. Indiana has put into place a system where the money follows the child. This has made planning within public schools especially difficult as students can now leave in the middle of the year. How is anyone supposed to properly plan for the number of teachers to hire and the number of school buildings to keep open? Furthermore, this system has led to public schools competing for students, a system I deplore. If programming like an elementary-level STEM or bi-lingual school is good, then let's look to provide that in as many places as possible. If a given school district cannot offer a given program and a student wants to transfer to another school district, I believe only part of the money should follow the child. Charter and public schools also rob the public of oversight of the curriculum. Charters and vouchers have arisen for a variety of reasons, but I think we should address the underlying reasons rather than make teachers and schools scape-goats for student outcomes. We need to capture what is good about certain charter and private schools and introduce them into our public school system. Instead of all the fighting, we should get back to educating future generations.
Matt Pierce
Vouchers and unlimited expansion of charter schools is undermining public education by siphoning funds away from public schools. In many cases these schools are doing no better or worse than public schools when it comes to academic achievement. If these policies are left unchecked, the state will ultimately have a two-tier system of education with public schools struggling to educate students with the greatest learning challenges that private and charter schools refuse to accept.
3. Do you support public funding of private schools through “choice scholarships”/vouchers? If you favor vouchers, do you see any need to limit the funding for them? Please explain.
Bill Breeden
No. Private schools should be privately funded.
Steve Lindsey
No- As a parent and taxpayer, I feel I should have a right to send my child to the school of my choice, but not all of the money should transfer with the child. It's a choice, with choice comes personal responsibility
Linda Henderson
Not a fan of vouchers or "choice scholarships". Believe this directs money away from public education. I have no problem with parents wanting to send their children to private schools - I have a problem with public dollars following them.
Penny Githens
I do not favor "choice scholarships"/vouchers, especially knowing that 90% of the vouchers pay for tuition in religious-based schools. Rather than funding vouchers, let's fund innovation. I am an outspoken supporter of public schools.
Matt Pierce
I oppose private school vouchers and "choice scholarships". They both result in tax dollars being diverted to private and religious schools with little accountability. The voucher program has now been expanded to students who have never attended a public school, costing the state $53 million dollars in the 3015-16 school year. I supported a separate budget line item for vouchers to make clear the true cost to taxpayers. However, the Republican majority in the General Assembly refused to make the cost transparent.
Bill Breeden
No. Private schools should be privately funded.
Steve Lindsey
No- As a parent and taxpayer, I feel I should have a right to send my child to the school of my choice, but not all of the money should transfer with the child. It's a choice, with choice comes personal responsibility
Linda Henderson
Not a fan of vouchers or "choice scholarships". Believe this directs money away from public education. I have no problem with parents wanting to send their children to private schools - I have a problem with public dollars following them.
Penny Githens
I do not favor "choice scholarships"/vouchers, especially knowing that 90% of the vouchers pay for tuition in religious-based schools. Rather than funding vouchers, let's fund innovation. I am an outspoken supporter of public schools.
Matt Pierce
I oppose private school vouchers and "choice scholarships". They both result in tax dollars being diverted to private and religious schools with little accountability. The voucher program has now been expanded to students who have never attended a public school, costing the state $53 million dollars in the 3015-16 school year. I supported a separate budget line item for vouchers to make clear the true cost to taxpayers. However, the Republican majority in the General Assembly refused to make the cost transparent.
4. What should be the oversight of institutions approving or denying charter school applications, and should those institutions include private religious colleges? Please explain.
Bill Breeden
The state should not be funding private education, and certainly not religious institutions.
Steve Lindsey
They should have to meet the same guidelines as public schools in student testing, teacher evaluations, and student expectations.
Linda Henderson
There should be definite oversight. This oversight should include representatives from the education community - with background in teaching and administration. Would support studying how other states provide this type of oversight.
Penny Githens
Private religious colleges should not have the authority to grant or deny charter school applications. Their deliberation process is not open to the public, their boards are not publicly elected officials, their boards may not even live in the state where they have the authority to grant charters, and there is a conflict of interest since private institutions receive 3% of tuition money from the state. If we must continue to have charter schools, there should be a single, state-authorized board that grants charters and has the authority to revoke the charters of under-performing schools.
Matt Pierce
The authorization of charter schools should never have been extended to private institutions that are not accountable to the public. There is an inherent conflict of interest because the private institutions that authorize charter schools receive a percentage of the charter's funding. I authored a provision that is now law which requires private institutions to establish a separate entity to approve charter schools and that entity is subject to the same open door and open record requirements as a state institution.
Bill Breeden
The state should not be funding private education, and certainly not religious institutions.
Steve Lindsey
They should have to meet the same guidelines as public schools in student testing, teacher evaluations, and student expectations.
Linda Henderson
There should be definite oversight. This oversight should include representatives from the education community - with background in teaching and administration. Would support studying how other states provide this type of oversight.
Penny Githens
Private religious colleges should not have the authority to grant or deny charter school applications. Their deliberation process is not open to the public, their boards are not publicly elected officials, their boards may not even live in the state where they have the authority to grant charters, and there is a conflict of interest since private institutions receive 3% of tuition money from the state. If we must continue to have charter schools, there should be a single, state-authorized board that grants charters and has the authority to revoke the charters of under-performing schools.
Matt Pierce
The authorization of charter schools should never have been extended to private institutions that are not accountable to the public. There is an inherent conflict of interest because the private institutions that authorize charter schools receive a percentage of the charter's funding. I authored a provision that is now law which requires private institutions to establish a separate entity to approve charter schools and that entity is subject to the same open door and open record requirements as a state institution.
5. What authority or input should the local community have in approving a charter school or affecting change in the school as they would with a publicly elected school board?
Bill Breeden
The local community should have access to all administrative meetings of any school using public funds.
Steve Lindsey
Our local public schools do represent our local communities, so they should help be accountable
Linda Hendersen
Believe local communities should have input - how that should happen - I am not sure. Would want to look at examples/proposals before advocating a position.
Penny Githens
In Washington, D.C., charter schools are overseen by the public school system. If charters were part of our local school system, our elected school board would have the authority to authorize and oversee such schools. That would put oversight directly into the hands of the local community. Otherwise, charter school boards should be elected from the county in which they are located/headquartered, with the charter school paying for the complete cost of such an election.
Matt Pierce
The state should return to the original charter school concept -- allowing local school boards to establish charter schools in the public school system with the flexibility to pilot new teaching methods. Instead, charter schools have become an indirect way to enact vouchers by redirecting tax dollars to schools controlled by private individuals not accountable to the public.
Bill Breeden
The local community should have access to all administrative meetings of any school using public funds.
Steve Lindsey
Our local public schools do represent our local communities, so they should help be accountable
Linda Hendersen
Believe local communities should have input - how that should happen - I am not sure. Would want to look at examples/proposals before advocating a position.
Penny Githens
In Washington, D.C., charter schools are overseen by the public school system. If charters were part of our local school system, our elected school board would have the authority to authorize and oversee such schools. That would put oversight directly into the hands of the local community. Otherwise, charter school boards should be elected from the county in which they are located/headquartered, with the charter school paying for the complete cost of such an election.
Matt Pierce
The state should return to the original charter school concept -- allowing local school boards to establish charter schools in the public school system with the flexibility to pilot new teaching methods. Instead, charter schools have become an indirect way to enact vouchers by redirecting tax dollars to schools controlled by private individuals not accountable to the public.
6. How should the charter school program in Indiana be evaluated?
Bill Breeden
The program should be evaluated by the Superintendent of Education's office, and should be held to the same standards.
Steve Lindsey
Charter schools should be evaluated the same as public schools.
Linda Hendersen
Evaluation should be conducted by an independent entity to assure a no conflicts.
Penny Githens
On the same basis that we judge all other public schools. We also need to be aggressive about holding administrative staff and board members financially accountable for charter schools that close in the middle of a school year. Boards which accept loans for purchasing or renovating facilities should also be held financially accountable if the school closes before the debt has been paid off.
Matt Pierce
Charter schools should be held to the same standards as traditional public schools. They should not be allowed to shop around for a new approval after losing an original charter.
Bill Breeden
The program should be evaluated by the Superintendent of Education's office, and should be held to the same standards.
Steve Lindsey
Charter schools should be evaluated the same as public schools.
Linda Hendersen
Evaluation should be conducted by an independent entity to assure a no conflicts.
Penny Githens
On the same basis that we judge all other public schools. We also need to be aggressive about holding administrative staff and board members financially accountable for charter schools that close in the middle of a school year. Boards which accept loans for purchasing or renovating facilities should also be held financially accountable if the school closes before the debt has been paid off.
Matt Pierce
Charter schools should be held to the same standards as traditional public schools. They should not be allowed to shop around for a new approval after losing an original charter.
7. Do you support the use of A to F grading of schools based on student test scores? Please explain.
Bill Breeden
No. It is too simplistic. We need to eliminate standardized testing and return to education lead my certified teachers.
Steve Lindsey
No, this is because right now there is no accountability for students, just teachers. Grading, schools will reflect or label the whole community.
Linda Hendersen
I do not support the use of a grading scale based on student scores. This does not reflect the quality of work taking place in a school.
Penny Githens
No. Instead of summative testing, we should be using formative testing so that we can track student improvement. Good formative testing would also help us identify areas of weakness and strength for each student. Data indicates that an individual student's success is closely linked with the socio-economic status of his or her family. If you have a preponderance of low-income students in a school, these students are not likely to show the same achievement as their middle-class peers. Instead of penalizing these students, we should be working to ameliorate their deficits. For example, we know the critical role vocabulary plays in reading comprehension, so if a beginning kindergarten student has a vocabulary of only 500 words, let's immediately work to build that student's vocabulary. If a student comes from a home where there is insufficient food in the house -- or lives in an area described as a "food desert" -- let's provide both proper nutrition and education on what constitutes proper nutrition. Intervention, rather than punitive grading of teachers and schools, is what is needed to move students forward.
Matt Pierce
The attempt to label schools with an A through F grade is counter-productive and has been thoroughly discredited. Those controlling the grading system can easily manipulate it to reach a desired outcome. Student test scores should only be used to identify students that need additional help to reach achievement goals.
Bill Breeden
No. It is too simplistic. We need to eliminate standardized testing and return to education lead my certified teachers.
Steve Lindsey
No, this is because right now there is no accountability for students, just teachers. Grading, schools will reflect or label the whole community.
Linda Hendersen
I do not support the use of a grading scale based on student scores. This does not reflect the quality of work taking place in a school.
Penny Githens
No. Instead of summative testing, we should be using formative testing so that we can track student improvement. Good formative testing would also help us identify areas of weakness and strength for each student. Data indicates that an individual student's success is closely linked with the socio-economic status of his or her family. If you have a preponderance of low-income students in a school, these students are not likely to show the same achievement as their middle-class peers. Instead of penalizing these students, we should be working to ameliorate their deficits. For example, we know the critical role vocabulary plays in reading comprehension, so if a beginning kindergarten student has a vocabulary of only 500 words, let's immediately work to build that student's vocabulary. If a student comes from a home where there is insufficient food in the house -- or lives in an area described as a "food desert" -- let's provide both proper nutrition and education on what constitutes proper nutrition. Intervention, rather than punitive grading of teachers and schools, is what is needed to move students forward.
Matt Pierce
The attempt to label schools with an A through F grade is counter-productive and has been thoroughly discredited. Those controlling the grading system can easily manipulate it to reach a desired outcome. Student test scores should only be used to identify students that need additional help to reach achievement goals.
8. For over 100 years, Indiana’s superintendent of public instruction served as chair of the State Board of Education. The Indiana legislature decided in 2015 that the chair of the State Board of Education should be selected from appointees on the State Board instead of being the elected state superintendent. Do you agree with this decision? Why or why not?
Bill Breeden
The superintendent of public instruction should serve as the chair of the State Board of education. She is an elected official and accountable to the voters, not to the Governor.
Steve Lindsey
No. The superintendent of public education is an elected office by the people of the state. Appointed positions are all political and then they do what they are told instead of doing what's right. It's a" Gerry rigged" system with appointment.
Linda Hendersen
NO - I do not agree. This change was a direct attempt to undermined the role of the Supt. of Public Instruction.
Penny Githens
I do not agree with the decision made in 2015. Our state superintendent of public instruction was elected, in part, to serve as the chair of the State Board of Education, and she should retain that position. After all, what happens when the legislature suddently decides that the voters in Indiana are wrong about whom they have elected governor and begin to strip that person of his/her authority? We need to codify the role of the state superintendent of public instruction, specifying that he/she is to serve as the chair of the State Board of Education.
Matt Pierce
I voted against removing the State Superintendent of Public Instruction from the chair of the State Board of Education and the numerous other attempts to undermine her authority. These efforts also undermined the will of the people who clearly voted to reject the policies of the previous Superintendent of Public Instruction when he was soundly defeated at the polls. It revealed the current legislature's lack of respect for the democratic process.
Bill Breeden
The superintendent of public instruction should serve as the chair of the State Board of education. She is an elected official and accountable to the voters, not to the Governor.
Steve Lindsey
No. The superintendent of public education is an elected office by the people of the state. Appointed positions are all political and then they do what they are told instead of doing what's right. It's a" Gerry rigged" system with appointment.
Linda Hendersen
NO - I do not agree. This change was a direct attempt to undermined the role of the Supt. of Public Instruction.
Penny Githens
I do not agree with the decision made in 2015. Our state superintendent of public instruction was elected, in part, to serve as the chair of the State Board of Education, and she should retain that position. After all, what happens when the legislature suddently decides that the voters in Indiana are wrong about whom they have elected governor and begin to strip that person of his/her authority? We need to codify the role of the state superintendent of public instruction, specifying that he/she is to serve as the chair of the State Board of Education.
Matt Pierce
I voted against removing the State Superintendent of Public Instruction from the chair of the State Board of Education and the numerous other attempts to undermine her authority. These efforts also undermined the will of the people who clearly voted to reject the policies of the previous Superintendent of Public Instruction when he was soundly defeated at the polls. It revealed the current legislature's lack of respect for the democratic process.