An effective and inspirational colleague has a t-shirt that reads, All behavior is communication. It’s reminiscent of Maya Angelou’s “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.” Matthew 7:15-20 offers a powerful version, too. The issue of whether to use public tax-dollar vouchers to pay for private education shows us how backers of HB93 are building the infrastructure that will enforce state religion. Thanks to the IEA and others, we may prevent HB93 from moving ahead.
It’s time defenders of public education view with clear-eyes and resolute hearts the fact that HB93 is fruit of the Project 2025 tree. And can we see that P2025 is not social theory… not intellectual nor philosophical. It’s not a conservative way to interpret our Constitution. It’s not debatable. The roots of P2025/HB93 grow out of Dominion theology, Catholic Integralism, New Apostolic Reformation, and even AI-driven techno-theology… and at its core it’s an iron-fist drive to dominate “7 Mountains”. It’s 100% anti-democratic in that it’s 100% hierarchical. Its many rich and powerful supporter-salesmen wear Biblical righteousness. But these are the exact people who believe they have figured out how to thread a needle with a camel.
HB93’s full story, including the lawsuit against it, brings these loose strands together. Remember how HB93 came to be? Not coincidentally, it parallels the way Project 2025 grew up. It required billions of dollars of ideological, power/money-seeking PACs and individuals and their onslaught of years’-worth of propaganda about the “filth” of public education… and this primed the pump. HB93 was devised behind exclusive, pre-session, closed-door meetings before being introduced on its circuitous pathway, snaking through the legislature, avoiding any education committee (bypassing serious debate on obvious Constitutional conflict) and found a home in Tax and Revenue. “Debate” there included some testimony of people who stated simply that because Trump endorsed HB93, ‘nuff said! And so, it was. The cherry-picked testimony carefully avoided most opposition voices and favored those of students and families who are happy with their private/homeschool education (as if that were even relevant to the debate). And then the whole thing with the thousands of emails, calls, and Little’s signature anyway… In the end, those who devised and passed HB93 performed semi-normal procedures for passing a bill, though much of the discourse on the foundational issues felt as hollow as their support for the Idaho State Constitution.
We can see through the cynicism that ushered in HB93. If educational “choice” sounded right to you and HB93 looked poised to make it happen to benefit Idaho, look again at what opportunity exits within our public and charter systems. Idahoans can learn about the freedom we already have to innovate, and how it can be done without families paying anything out of pocket–though it may involve some healthy civic engagement. HB93-“Choice” won’t convert our public tax dollars into new valuable opportunities. It will offer payment to families to disengage from the important project of what Article IX in the Idaho Constitution calls, The stability of a republican form of government depending mainly upon the intelligence of the people, it shall be the duty of the legislature of Idaho, to establish and maintain a general, uniform and thorough system of public, free common schools.
MLK, Jr. said, “The time is always right to do what is right.” Our government passed HB93, in spite of the Idaho Constitution. I’m proud to stand with Idaho educators across the political spectrum in the Idaho Education Association while we bring suit against HB93. Our mission? Uphold the promise of Idaho’s Constitution for the people of Idaho. And we’ve managed to find ways to keep our eyes on that prize.
We can know our opposition and ourselves–and test ourselves. If the words in Idaho’s Constitution still have meaning, and if the Idaho Supreme Court has courage and supports our Constitution, then our case is the one with merit.
