On their website today, the national Home School Legal Defense Association has issued a legislative action center alert to it’s membership in opposition to South Dakota’s House Bill 1020, noting their desire to “Keep Alternative Instruction Free.”
Noting their position, the organization stands in opposition to the ESA/Voucher bill because:
WHAT’S HSLDA’S POSITION ON H.B. 1020?
HSLDA opposes H.B. 1020 for the following reasons.
First, we oppose the idea that alternative instruction is a qualifying school for purposes of government funding. If the South Dakota legislature wanted to create an ESA, they can (and should) do so in a way that creates a separate compulsory attendance category and does not overlap with the existing alternative instruction law. Several states, including Arizona, West Virginia, and Florida, have already done this. South Dakota can and should follow suit.
Second, H.B. 1020 defines curriculum as “a course of study … approved by the Department of Education.” This represents an increase in government control over education and a step-backward for Alternative Instruction. It is a strong example that what the government funds, the government regulates in some form. This is represents a potential loss of freedom for alternative instruction students and is a significant concern.
Third, we strongly oppose the idea that alternative instruction should be included in the definition of a microschool. We believe there is a fundamental difference between a school that requires enrollment and tuition and must register with the South Dakota secretary of state and parents who teach their children at home under alternative instruction. H.B. 1020’s definition removes what is at the heart of alternative instruction.
The pre-filed measure will be scheduled for heading early on in the legislative session.