BOISE (Lewiston Tribune) — Idaho's first-ever school choice bill is on the verge of becoming law, awaiting just the signature of Governor Brad Little. On Wednesday, the Senate narrowly approved House Bill 93, which allocates $50 million for tax credits aimed at private school tuition, microschools, and other educational expenses.
Wednesday’s Senate vote marked a significant moment for the state, as it opens the door for public funds to flow to private education, a concept Little had resisted in previous years. This time, during his State of the State address, Little emphasized he could support school choice legislation if it was “fair, responsible, transparent, and accountable.”
“It must prioritize the families who need it most and it must not take funds away from public schools,” he stated, highlighting his balancing act between promoting school choice and protecting public education funding. Notably, he recommended the $50 million for school choice as part of his proposed budget.
After the Senate’s approval, the governor’s office provided Idahoans with the chance to voice their opinions through its dedicated live feedback line at (208) 334-2100. Callers can indicate their preference for the bill by pressing 1, indicating support for signing it, or pressing 2, urging the governor to veto it. The line has seen some technical difficulties, causing frustration as some callers reported “system problems.”
Little's office did not respond to questions about the feedback voicemail system by press time, leaving residents curious about the robustness of the participation process.
Meanwhile, nearly 1,800 miles away, another public feedback controversy is brewing. With less than one week remaining for feedback submission on the University Grants Commission's (UGC) proposed regulations about appointing university teachers and Vice-Chancellors, states governed by parties opposed to the BJP Alliance have intensified their opposition.
High-profile meetings have taken place among leaders from Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, and Karnataka, expressing concerns about the centralization of power, which they argue undermines federalism and dilutes the autonomy of state universities.
At the heart of the matter are proposed regulations allowing nomination of Vice-Chancellors by committees involving central authority figures including the UGC Chairman and governors, sidelining state higher education departments. This structure has drawn criticism for potentially leaving several state universities without leadership.
UGC Chairman M. Jagadesh Kumar defended the regulations, arguing they would "eliminate ambiguity and ensures a more transparent process.” Yet, resistance grows from those who assert the new rules threaten academic standards and increase undue commercial pressures on higher education.
The acute concern extends beyond state politics; it raises fundamental questions about the balance of power between the Center and States under India’s governance framework. Can the rules framed by the central government override existing state laws? The situation is drawing heightened scrutiny as dissenting states prepare to contest the regulations legally and politically.
States have urged the UGC to acknowledge their concerns and reconsider the damaging provisions outlined before the final regulations are imposed. They want to retain their seat at the table, especially since they shoulder much of the financial burdens associated with public education.
The developments from both Idaho and India highlight the significance of public input, spotlighting how community sentiments can shape educational policy dynamics across vastly different governance structures. An engaged electorate can drive important changes, ensuring legislation considers the voices it most impacts.
Whether or not Little signs Idaho's school choice bill remains to be seen, but as public sentiment becomes clearer, it seems the openness of such dialogues is becoming increasingly important for effective governance and local support.