December 22, 2017

(ESEA, ADVOCACY TOOLS) Permanent link

ESSA Fiscal Transparency: Webinar Q&A Transcript

Earlier this month, AASA hosted a webinar about the fiscal transparency requirements within the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). ESSA includes a new fiscal transparency reporting requirement, whereby states will have to detail per pupil expenditures at the school and district level. This will have implications for districts in ensuring they understand their own allocation constructs, what it means for the schools they serve, and how it can be perceived in the community. The webinar detailed what the requirement entails, what it will mean for state and district leaders, and things for districts to consider as they share this information with their communities. 

 

  • You can access an archived copy of the webinar here
  • Q&A: You can read the transcript of the Q&A portion of the webinar. 
  • The Q&A references a handout with additional detail on the reporting requirement, which you can access here

 

December 20, 2017

(ESEA) Permanent link

Toolkit for ESSA Early Learning Requirements

Under ESSA, districts receiving Title I funds now face new requirements and opportunities regarding early childhood programs. We were happy to take part in developing a toolkit for superintendents to use to understand these new requirements and opportunities and especially to assist in the development of agreements with Head Start and other early childhood programs, as is now required. The toolkit, available here, includes and explanation of all of ESSA's early childhood components as well as sample MOUs that can be used by superintendents when developing their own agreements.

December 18, 2017

(ADVOCACY TOOLS, ED FUNDING) Permanent link

Call to Action: Kill the Tax Bill

This week, Congress is poised to vote the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act into law. AASA is opposed to this legislation, and we urge all AASA members and public school advocates to contact their full Congressional delegation and ask them to OPPOSE the bill. We've included all the information you need below, including background, contact information and talking points.

Background

  • AASA joins four national organizations in letter of opposition to tax bill. Read our letter here. We were joined by the Association of School Business Officials, International; Association of Educational Service Agencies National Rural Education Association; and National Rural Education Advocacy Consortium.
  • This guest blog post does a great job explaining five reasons this bill is no good for public education. 
  • This month's The Advocate was focused on the tax bill, provided a side-by-side of the House and Senate bills, and explained how and why we are opposed to certain education-impacting provisions.
  • Executive Director Daniel A. Domenech's response to the Senate vote articulated are continued frustration and disappointment with the bills as drafted and the apparent disregard for how these tax policies have no support for public education. 
  • Guest blog post from ASBO Executive Director John Musso detailed the implications of proposed changes to bond and finance options for schools. 

Call to Action:

Both the House and Senate are set to vote on the conferenced Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, bringing the bill one step closer to the President’s desk and being signed into law.  AASA has been engaged in the process of this year’s effort to overhaul the tax code. We reviewed and opposed both the House and Senate bills, and detailed our opposition to specific provisions which undermine federal support for public education and will negatively impact state and local funding for public schools. Unfortunately, the bill going back to both the Senate and House chambers failed to make any changes that allow the bill to support and strengthen public education. To that end, we have a two-prong call to action: We ask you to both call your Congressional offices (the phone tallies count!!) AND to email the staff in your Congressional offices. 

  1. Call the Congressional Switch board (202) 224-3121 and ask to be transferred to your Senators/Representative. The person who answers is taking a tally of votes for and against, and the script you can read is below.
  2. Email the education staffer and legislative director for each of your Congressional delegation. You can email ALL of your Congressional offices at once; you want to send this email to the people in the office who are handling/tracking the policy specifics.

PHONE SCRIPT   

  • Hello! My name is [___] and I’m the superintendent in xxxx District in his district. I’m calling to let Congressman ______ know that I strongly oppose the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act because of the devastating impact it will have on my students and community.
  • My opposition to the tax reform is driven by specific provisions which will negatively impact our nation’s public schools. 
  • First, this legislation would incentivize upper-middle-class and wealthy Americans to educate their children in private schools by providing them with a tax break as they can now utilize 529 accounts for private k12 education. These drastic changes would enable anyone, regardless of their wealth, to put aside significantly more dollars for use at private schools, at a greater expense to taxpayers and schools. 
  • I am also deeply concerned by changes to the State and Local Tax Deduction. The proposed changes to SALT will hurt more than 43 million taxpayers from all 50 states and across all income brackets, it also will hurt the ability of state and local governments, including my school district, to fund essential services such as public education. State and local funding accounts for about 90 percent of funding for K-12 schools, meaning that any reduction in state revenue—which will likely happen when any state or local tax is perceived as a double tax when it cannot be deducted—will almost certainly lead to cuts in public education.  Over time, it is likely that a change in this tax provision would erode funding for education at a level deep enough to mirror a direct cut in federal, state and/or local funding. 
  • I am concerned with the significant share of deficit financing being used to off set the extensive tax cuts. I am concerned with how this large growth in the deficit will limit the ability and willingness of Congress to invest in critical programs, and this will translate into spending cuts for programs, including critical education programs. 
  • I urge Senator/Representative ______ to oppose this bill, which has the potential to decimate education funding for our state. 

EMAIL TEXT

Do you need the name and email address of the education staffer and legislative director for anyone in your Congressional delegation? Let us know, or email your state association director. We gave them the full set of contact information.

Use the text below as the basis of your email, and feel free to personalize with details about your district or specifics on what the tax policy ramifications will mean for your state and district.

Dear {INSERT NAME},

  • My name is [___] and I’m the superintendent in xxxx District in his district. I’m emailing to let Representative ______ know that I strongly oppose the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act because of the devastating impact it will have on my students and community.
  • My opposition to the tax reform is driven by specific provisions which will negatively impact our nation’s public schools. 
  • This legislation would incentivize upper-middle-class and wealthy Americans to educate their children in private schools by providing them with a tax break as they can now utilize 529 accounts for private k12 education. These drastic changes would enable anyone, regardless of their wealth, to put aside significantly more dollars for use at private schools, at a greater expense to taxpayers and schools. 
  • I am also deeply concerned by changes to the State and Local Tax Deduction. The proposed changes to SALT will hurt more than 43 million taxpayers from all 50 states and across all income brackets, it also will hurt the ability of state and local governments, including my school district, to fund essential services such as public education. State and local funding accounts for about 90 percent of funding for K-12 schools, meaning that any reduction in state revenue—which will likely happen when any state or local tax is perceived as a double tax when it cannot be deducted—will almost certainly lead to cuts in public education.  Over time, it is likely that a change in this tax provision would erode funding for education at a level deep enough to mirror a direct cut in federal, state and/or local funding. 
  • I am concerned with the significant share of deficit financing being used to justify the extensive tax cuts. I am concerned with how this large growth in the deficit will limit the ability and willingness of Congress to invest in critical programs, and this will translate into spending cuts for programs, including critical education programs. 
  • I urge Senator/Representative ______ to oppose this bill, which has the potential to decimate education funding for our state. 

 

 

 

 

December 15, 2017

(ADVOCACY TOOLS, GUEST BLOGS, ED FUNDING) Permanent link

Guest Blog Post: 5 reasons why Congress should protect public schools, reject tax plan

Today's guest blog post comes from Lawrence (Larry) Feinberg, School Director in Harverford Township. This piexe originally appeared in the Opinion Section of the Delaware County Daily Times. 

I am writing on behalf of the Delaware County School Boards Legislative Council to urge readers and all public education stakeholders to contact their members of Congress and ask them to vote No on the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act when it returns to the House of Representatives. The Legislative Council is comprised of locally elected volunteer school directors representing each of the 15 school districts in Delaware County.

More than 50 million (90 percent) of U.S. schoolchildren attend public schools. The tax reform bill being considered in the U.S. Congress poses a very real threat to our public school students, parents and taxpayers.

Here are five reasons for our members of Congress to vote NO:

 

  1. Elimination of State & Local Tax (SALT) Deductibility: As currently proposed, the House and Senate versions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act would eliminate deductibility of sales and income taxes paid to state and local governments; and, both bills would limit deductibility of property tax payments to $10,000. Capping or eliminating the SALT deduction will put intense pressure on state and local governments to cut their own taxes in the face of constituents with higher federal tax bills and lead to reduced services. We urge our members of Congress to support our students, their families and communities by maintaining full deductibility of state and local taxes.
  2. Elimination of Bond Financing Options: Currently, school districts have access to a variety of bond and financing options when it comes to paying for/affording capital and infrastructure projects. We can use these options to save our taxpayers millions of dollars on outstanding debt. Both the House and Senate bills would eliminate some of those options. If the changes go through, it would increase taxpayer costs incurred by school districts associated with financing school construction and renovation.
  3. Increase of $1.5 Trillion in Federal Deficit: The tax cuts in the bill need to be paid for, and neither the House nor the Senate bill completely offset the costs associated with their plan. Instead, they have authorized themselves to raise the nation’s deficit over 10 years to pay for the portion they aren’t paying for now (estimated to be $1.5 trillion). Congress will feel pressure to make cuts elsewhere, and those cuts will fall to education and non-defense discretionary spending.
  4. Expansion of 529 Program to Include K-12 Expenses: Provisions in the House and Senate bills would create a separate unaccountable system of publicly funded and/or subsidized education for non-public schools through the proposed expansion of 529 education savings accounts. Instead, we urge your strong support for the range of choices that are currently offered by our nation’s public school districts, such as magnet schools, charter schools authorized by local school boards and schools with specialized curricula for science, technology, engineering, the arts, and mathematics (STEAM). 
  5. Repeal of $250 Deduction Available for Teachers Who Spend Their Own Money on Classroom Materials and Supplies: Current law allows teachers to exclude up to $250 from income when those dollars were spent on books, supplies, professional development and other classroom expense. The House bill eliminates this exclusion; the Senate bill would double the maximum (to $500).

 

Please contact your members of Congress and urge them to support the schools that educate over ninety percent of our kids; tell them to vote NO on the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

You can find your Pennsylvania Congressman’s contact information here

(AASA Edit: You can find your member of Congress here.)

Lawrence A. Feinberg is a fifth-term school director in Haverford Township and serves as chairman of the Delaware County School Boards Legislative Council. Any comments contained herein are his comments, alone, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of any other person or organization that I may be affiliated with.

December 13, 2017(1)

(ESEA, RESEARCH, PUBLICATIONS AND TOOLKITS) Permanent link

ESSA Stakeholder Engagement: Continuing the Conversation

Since the passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) has convened a broad group of education associations to talk and work through the important work of stakeholder engagement. AASA has been involved in the conversations and is pleased to share the latest CCSSO publication, Let's Continue This Conversation: How to Turn New Stakeholder Connections into Long-Term Relationships

As the implementation of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) begins, now is the time to reiterate your commitment and turn these new connections into long-term relationships by establishing sustainable ways to continue to listen to, inform and learn from your stakeholders. This guide is intended to help states assess the engagement strategies used during the ESSA development stage, identify the ones to sustain or refine, and develop a long-term plan that will continue to create opportunities for stakeholders to be heard on this and other education issues. You can access it on the CCSSO website, as well. 

December 13, 2017

(ED FUNDING, THE ADVOCATE) Permanent link

The Advocate, December 2017

By Noelle Ellerson Ng, associate executive director, policy and advocacy, AASA

As 2017 draws to a close, federal advocacy and its implications for education are far from boring. Between the need to avoid a federal shutdown—a tough task further complicated by considerations related to deferred action for childhood arrivals, an effort to raise the funding caps, a push to provide funding for the children’s health insurance program (CHIP), and more—and regular order, the fact that Congress is gunning to push through the GOP tax bill means the end of the year will be active, intense, and likely down to the last minute.

The House and the Senate have both passed their respective versions of the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act. Both bills are highlight partisan, relying exclusively on Republican support, and the GOP is committed to seeing this proposal through to completion to notch a win in its belt before 2017 draws to a close. As the president and Congress move forward with their efforts to overhaul the federal tax code, it is important to have an understanding of how the proposed reforms will affect education. Tax reform and related changes may not affect education as directly as changes in annual federal funding (appropriations), but the potential consequences are significant. That is how AASA came to be engaged in the current effort to overhaul federal tax code. AASA efforts in monitoring the tax bill have been focused on specific policies that will impact public education. We provided a summary of these issues in a memo this summer, and issued various resources with detailed analysis on the blog

The bills will now go through the process of conference, where by the chambers will reconcile the differences that exist between the bills and emerge with one final bill that will then need to be adopted by both chambers and then signed into law by the president.  Congressional Research Service prepared a white paper on what the conference process involves, which you can access here.

Education Impact: AASA has centered our engagement in tax policy on four specific provisions (state and local tax deduction; expansion of 529 plans; changes to school construction finance bond options; and reliance on deficit financing to pay for the tax cuts). Details of our position can be found in our letters of opposition as sent to both the House and Senate. There are other policies that impact education, some of which are included in the analysis below.

  • State and Local Tax Deduction (SALT-D): Currently, tax payers can deduct the amount they pay in state and local taxes before calculating their federal income tax. Both the House and Senate bills make changes to how individuals can deduce SAL taxes, but not corporations. The bills allow for the deduction of property taxes (Capped at $10,000) and eliminate the deduction for income and personal property taxes).
  • 529 College Savings Plans: Currently, tax payers can put money away to pay costs associated with postsecondary education. The benefit associated with these accounts (the accrued/compounded interest) is not taxed when the dollars are drawn down for eligible college expanses, and annual withdrawals are capped at $2000. Under both the House and Senate bills, the plans would be expanded to allow withdrawals of up to $10,000 per year and expand the plans to allow the funds to be used for costs associated with costs associated with public/private elementary/secondary education. The Senate bill also expands the program allows the withdrawals to be used for home-schooling expenses.
  • Bonds: Currently, school districts have access to a variety of bonds and financing options when it comes to paying for/affording capital and infrastructure projects. These programs include Qualified Zone Academy Bonds (QZABs), advanced refunding, and private activity bonds. (You can read a good explainer on the blog.) The House bill eliminates QZABs, QCEBs, advanced refunding and private activity bonds. The Senate bill does not address tax credit bonds or private activity bonds, but does end advanced refunding effective December 31, 2017. If the changes go through, it would increase the costs incurred by school district association with financing school construction and renovation.
  • Lack of Pay Fors: The tax cuts in the bill need to be paid for, and neither the House nor the Senate bill completely offset the costs associated with their plan. Instead, they have authorized themselves to raise the nation’s deficit over ten years to pay for the portion they aren’t paying for now (and (estimated to be $1.5 trillion). AASA is concerned that should a tax plan that is deficit-financed move forward, Congress will feel pressure to make cuts elsewhere, and that those cuts will fall to education and non-defense discretionary spending. Congress already struggles to avoid deep cuts to important education programs as they work to comply with existing federal funding caps and constraints; a debt-financed tax reform would only exacerbate this tension and the depth of cuts to important education programs.
  • Teacher Expenses: Current law allows eligible educators (including teachers) to exclude an amount not to exceed $250 from income when those dollars were spent on books, supplies, professional development and other classroom expense. The House bill eliminates this exclusion; the Senate bill would double the maximum (to $500).
  • College Affordability: Current law provides a variety of supports and tax incentives that help make higher education affordable. The House bill consolidates the current higher education tax credits, repeals the deduction for interest paid on student loans, repeals the deduction for tuition and related expenses, repeals the exclusion of interest from savings bonds used to pay education expenses, repeals the exclusion of tuition reductions, and repeals the exclusion of employer-provided education assistance. The Senate bill makes none of these changes.
  • Child Care Tax Credit: Current law allows an individual to claim a $1,000 tax credit for a qualifying child under the age of 17. The House bill raises the credit to $1,600 and phases out at $230,00 income level (married). The Senate bill raises the credit to $2,000 and phases out at $500,000 income level (married).

AASA remains opposed to the bill. We will urge Congress to oppose the bill in its current form, to rewrite provisions to better support and strengthen public education, to get serious about ensuring benefits—and not just fiscal burden—fall to the middle class, and to identify pay-fors to offset the tax cuts built into the bill. Candidly, many of these asks individually make the bill way harder to pass. When you factor in that we need multiple significant improvements, and the partisan political pressure to see this bill over the line, it is a Sisyphean feat that lies ahead. We stand ready for the work, and will make the information you need available. Let us know if you need anything further, and we’ll continue to carry the good message of public education and to relay the importance of Congress making sure that tax policy supports education policy. 

You can read AASA’s analysis/side-by-side comparison of the House and Senate bills on the blog and in this memo

December 13, 2017

 Permanent link

House Committee Passes HEA Reauthorization Bill

Late last night, after 14 hours of debate, the House Education and Workforce committee passed the Promoting Real Opportunity, Success, and Prosperity through Education Reform (PROSPER) Act, to reauthorize the Higher Education Act. The vote was 23-17, along party lines. The bill eliminates all elements of HEA that help K-12 teachers - TEACH grants, public service loan forgiveness, and all of Title II - including the Teacher Quality Partnership grants. In the place of TEACH grans and public service loan forgiveness, the bill adopts a "one grant, one loan, and one work-study system," putting teachers in the same loan and repayment system as all other loan recipients. This bill would exacerbate the teacher shortages seen across the country, especially in rural communities. 

The Senate has not yet released any language or priorities for their HEA strategy.

December 11 2017

(ESEA) Permanent link

Transition for ESSA Title I supplement, not supplant requirements

Last week, USED sent a note to State Education Agency (SEA) Title I Directors, regarding the timeline for compliance with the supplement, not supplant (SNS) requirements in ESSA. We share it here for your reference, and so you know what has been shared with your state agency.

Dear Colleague:

Thank you for your continued efforts to implement the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA).  To facilitate implementation and ensure a smooth transition to the new law, I am writing to inform you that the U.S. Department of Education (Department) will provide State educational agencies (SEAs) and local educational agencies (LEAs) additional time to implement the new requirement in section 1118(b)(2) of the ESEA for demonstrating compliance with the supplement not supplant requirement under Title I, Part A (Title I) of the ESEA.  In addition, I would like to highlight steps the Department is taking to support SEAs and LEAs in implementing this important new requirement.

Timeline for Implementation: Under section 1118(b)(2) of the ESEA, “[t]o demonstrate compliance with [the supplement not supplant requirement], a local educational agency shall demonstrate that the methodology used to allocate State and local funds to each school receiving [Title I funds] ensures that such school receives all of the State and local funds it would otherwise receive if it were not receiving [Title I funds].”  With respect to the timeline for implementation, section 1118(b)(5) of the ESEA requires that an LEA meet the compliance requirement not later than two years after the date of enactment of the ESSA— i.e., December 10, 2017.  We are aware that some SEAs and LEAs are taking steps to develop a methodology or use an existing methodology that meets the new compliance requirement by December 10, 2017, and we encourage those SEAs and LEAs to move forward with their process.  We also recognize that for many LEAs it may not be reasonable to implement a new methodology in the middle of a school year and that the first implementation of the methodology cannot occur until the beginning of the 2018-2019 school year.  Therefore, consistent with section 4(b) of the ESSA, which authorizes the Department to ensure an orderly transition to the new law, an SEA and its LEAs may delay meeting the compliance requirement in section 1118(b)(2) of the ESEA until the start of the 2018-2019 school year.  That is, an LEA does not need to have its methodology in place on December 10, 2017, but the LEA must have a methodology in place in time for the LEA to use it when ensuring that Title I funds are supplementing, and not supplanting, other State and local funds in the 2018-2019 school year. Of course, ESEA still requires that, even if the new methodology is not yet in place, SEAs and LEAs are utilizing all Title I, Part A funds only to supplement the funds that would, in the absence of such Title I, Part A funds, be made available from State and local sources for the education of students participating in programs assisted under Title I, Part A, and not to supplant, such State and local funds.

Additional Support: The supplement not supplant requirement under Title I remains critically important to ensuring that Title I funds provide additional resources to students and teachers in Title I schools that have high concentrations of students from low-income families to counteract the effects of poverty in order to make it more likely that all children are provided significant opportunity to receive a “fair, equitable, and high-quality education and to close educational achievement gaps,” which is identified in section 1001 of the ESEA as the purpose of Title I.  Therefore, we are committed to supporting SEAs and LEAs as they move forward with implementation of this critical requirement.  Part of this commitment is to meet with various stakeholders to receive input toward developing non-regulatory guidance on the new Title I supplement not supplant requirement to support SEAs and LEAs to making the transition to this new requirement.  

Thank you again for the work that you continue to do to implement the ESEA.  Please send suggestions of questions or topics that you would like to see the guidance address to your Office of State Support program officer at OSS.[State]@ed.gov (e.g., OSS.Nebraska@ed.gov) on or before January 17, 2018.

Sincerely,

Patrick Rooney
Deputy Director

Office of State Support

December 7, 2017(1)

(ADVOCACY TOOLS, ED FUNDING) Permanent link

Tax Cuts & Jobs Act: Side by Side Analysis

AASA is pleased to share its latest memo, an overview of the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act. The TCJA was passed by both the House and the Senate and will now move to conference as the chambers attempt to reconcile the differences between the bill while preserving enough support to get a final bill to the President's desk before Christmas. 

The memo is an overview of the bills, summarizes key provisions/changes as they relate to education, and provides a quick side-by-side comparison between the two bills.

December 7, 2017

(RURAL EDUCATION, ADVOCACY TOOLS, ED FUNDING) Permanent link

Bipartisan Group of 35 Senators Sends Letter to Leadership Supporting Secure Rural Schools

Earlier this week, a group of 35 bipartisan Senators sent a letter to Senate leadership urging them to include a reauthorization of the Secure Rural Schools program in any end-of-year legislation. You can read the full letter here, and it is a nice complement to a related letter sent by the Secure Rural Schools and Forest Counties Coalition and other supports to both house and senate leadership last month. 
"We write to strongly urge the inclusion of at least a two-year reauthorization of the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program, which enjoys tremendous bipartisan support, in any end-of-the-year legislation.

"On US Forest Service land, the federal government has historically shared 25 percent of timber harvest revenues with counties to compensate for federal ownership. On certain land managed by the Department of the Interior, the Bureau of Land Management shares 50 percent of the revenue from federal timber sales with counties. Due to declining timber harvests, a critical source of funding for rural counties, sometimes referred to as 'forest counties,' has seen significant decreases, often decimating impacted county budgets.

"In 2000, Congress passes SRS with broad bipartisan support as a fiscal solution to help fund essential services resulting from the reduced revenue-sharing receipts. Since then, SRS has been a critical lifeline for over 775 counties in over 40 states across the country by helping fund more than 4,000 schools, road maintenance, law enforcement, and search and rescue operations.

"We are now witnessing firsthand the hardships rural counties face as a result of SRS authorization lapsing. Without the certainty of SRS payments, schools, libraries, and jails are closing. Schools that remain open will see a reduction of teachers. Roads go unpaed and become unsafe. Mental and physical health services are scaled back or even ended. Fewer and fewer law enforcement officers are forced to patrol larger and larger areas.

"The SRS program continues to be a critical safety-net for forest counties as we work to diversify rural economies, improve forest management and forest health, strengthen historic forest revenue sharing with local governments, and ensure that our forests provide a range of values such as clean water, jobs, and wood fiber for local economies.

"In the interest of working together in a bipartisan way to support local rural communities, we ask that yo include a reauthorization of Secure Rural Schools in any end-of-year legislation. We appreciate your assistance with this matter."

December 2, 2017

(ADVOCACY TOOLS, ED FUNDING) Permanent link

AASA Response to Senate Vote on Tax Bill

AASA Executive Director Daniel A. Domenech released the following statement in response to the Senate vote for the Tax Cuts & Jobs bill: 

“AASA is frustrated by Congress’ continued partisan efforts to pass the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act. 

“Changes to tax policy can be a good thing, a chance for leadership and opportunity. The bill passed by the Senate fails on all of these fronts, threatens one of our nation’s original forms of infrastructure (public education) and stands to do far more harm, than good. As the national organization representing the leaders of our nation’s public school systems, we are frustrated with this tax plan and how those who voted for it lack an understanding of—or even care about—its impact on public schools. 

“We are concerned with the continued disconnect from Congressional leadership on how the policies in this bill—including the elimination of the SALT-D deduction, reliance on deficit financing, and changes to bond financing for districts—will negatively impact schools. Just two years ago, a GOP-led Congress supported an overwhelmingly bipartisan ESSA reauthorization. It was a pinnacle demonstration of support for policies centered on compromise, practicality, and supporting and strengthening the nation’s public schools. 

“While today’s vote is a significant pivot toward partisanship and corporate tax cuts paid for by the middle class, we remain committed to representing our members, the nation’s public school superintendents and will work tirelessly with our allies on Capitol Hill to mitigate the damages of this bill, to seek improvements in conference and to expand recognition of the importance of our nation’s public schools.” 

For specific questions, please contact Noelle Ellerson Ng, AASA associate executive director, policy and advocacy, at nellerson@aasa.org.