Beyond the Budget: Seeking Solutions in Delaware’s Education System

By: Jane Brady, Chair, A Better Delaware

 This is the third in a series of articles that will take a look at how the policy principles and legislative priorities of A Better Delaware fared in the last legislative session, which ended on June 30.  We have written over several years now about our perspective on healthcare, education, energy, the economy and workforce in Delaware, as well as the need for more accountability and better transparency in the way government works in Delaware. 

In this series, we will look at how the action the legislature took promotes or inhibits achievement of those policy objectives we feel are important to make Delaware a better place for families, workers, businesses and the community at large.

Education Policy

You may already know all the numbers. Delaware is in the top ten in spending on education, and the bottom five in student performance.  We have over a dozen schools with single digit proficiencies in math and reading, most of them minority majority.  Delaware spends over $20,000 per student per year, according to the latest figures from the Department of Education.  There has been an inverse correlation between increases in spending and lower achievement scores – as spending has gone up, performance has gone down.  The Governor just recommended, and the General Assembly passed, a budget that increases spending in education significantly, and includes $3 million for “literacy specialists,” who will teach teachers how to teach reading.

So, what is the good news? Well, there really is a science to teaching reading, and many new teachers were never taught how to teach it the way you probably learned – phonics is the key.  So, we commend the attention to reading. After all, if you can’t read, you can’t learn.  But, once again, the Governor and legislature came up short. They did not provide specific goals for everyone – students, teachers and parents to reach – proficiency in reading at grade level by grade 3. That has proven to be the “secret” to success in Mississippi, a state that performed miserably for decades, but instituted a law that students cannot earn that moniker “4^th grader” until they can read at a third-grade level. Mississippi, 6 or so years later, bests us by a mile. We need to establish goals and consequences in order to make change.  Just “teaching children to read” has failed Delaware students for some time now.

We had the opportunity to address some of the issues and bring transparency to the failings of these schools in the last General Assembly session.  The bill, HB 192 was proffered to require these poorly performing schools to present both short- and long-term plans to improve student performance to the Department of Education, and for the Department to issue an annual report on improvement (or the lack thereof).  While it passed in the House last year, and successfully passed through both the House and Senate Education Committees with bipartisan support, it has now stalled in the Senate.  Fearing that the bill will be a step toward school choice, the majority refused to bring it to a vote.

How arrogant! Because the other good news is that there are schools in Delaware that are succeeding. They just, mostly, are not public schools. You may have read in our previous newsletters that we at A Better Delaware support school choice, to give the poor students who are assigned to these poorly performing schools by a government that does not seem to be able to get the job done, a choice.  Other jurisdictions which have tried a choice program, enabling students to attend a private or parochial school of their choice, have seen remarkable gains in student success. And, we have proposed ways to offer choice without taking money out of the public schools. Our current education system, bloated and ineffective, is consigning children who are required to attend poorly performing schools, solely by virtue of their zip code, to more difficult lives than any of them deserve.

We can improve education in Delaware, but it requires leadership that recognizes that more money is not the answer. Specific goals, consequences and rewards with respect to those goals, and more transparency and choice all will serve the children of Delaware better. Better job opportunities, better financial security and more personal satisfaction with their lives. The children of Delaware deserve that. The General Assembly should not stand in the way.

Jane Brady serves as Chair of A Better Delaware. She previously served as Attorney General of Delaware and as a Judge of the Delaware Superior Court.

The Reality of Delaware’s Unrealistic and Expensive Energy Mandates

By: Jane Brady, Chair, A Better Delaware

 This is the second in a series of articles that will take a look at how the policy principles and legislative priorities of A Better Delaware fared in the last legislative session, which ended on June 30.  We have written over several years now about our perspective on healthcare, education, energy, the economy and workforce in Delaware, as well as the need for more accountability and better transparency in the way government works in Delaware. 

In this series, we will look at how the action the legislature took promotes or inhibits achievement of those policy objectives we feel are important to make Delaware a better place for families, workers, businesses and the community at large.

Energy Policy

Delaware’s government has made decisions in successive sessions with regard to energy that impact the poorest of our citizens most negatively. Those families in our state that struggle with the costs of basic necessities, such as food and housing, are now going to face additional costs for electricity and transportation.

The electric vehicle mandate which the General Assembly enacted would require families to pay about $10-20,000 more for a car that is electric than they would for a gas fueled car.  The cost of installation of a charger at your home is significant. But, of course, if you live, as many lower income people do, in an apartment or row home in the city, you won’t be able to charge your electric car at home. Additionally, there are very few public places you can do so.  Public transportation is limited, and not a realistic option for many to use to get to work or the store.   So, apart from the fact that we at A Better Delaware don’t think government should tell us what kind of car to buy, the impacts of this policy have been underappreciated.

And many of the wealthier among us who purchased an electric vehicle are having second thoughts. Why? Because electric vehicles lack the range, safety and ease of refueling that makes getting from here to there comfortable and reliable. The realities of the limited range, costs, safety concerns and lack of reliability are hitting home, and they are returning to gas powered cars.

But government is not learning any lessons from their experience, or others.  Recently, the Delaware legislature passed legislation that would mandate conversion of school buses from gas to electric.  They should learn from other school districts’ experiences. Just in March, it was reported that 20% of the entire fleet of electric school buses was not operating on any given day, according to the Director of the New York Association for Public Transportation, because of problems with the electric buses or their charging devices. Compare that breakdown rate with diesel buses which have a failure rate of 1 or 2%, and it’s easy to see that diesel is more reliable. More cost effective, too. The average cost for a diesel school bus is reportedly between $100-150,000.  Electric school buses cost between $3-400,000.  And that lack of reliability may also affect our poorest students, many of whom already have school attendance issues. Absenteeism is an increasing problem, exacerbated by the lack of stewardship in the delivery of education resources to Delaware students during the pandemic. Many of the poorest students rely on a bus to go to school. Reliable transportation is a necessity -they don’t have the independent means to provide their own transportation. The General Assembly needs to accept the reality that technology is not where they aspire it to be and until it is, they should spend our limited tax dollars responsibly, providing the most good to the greatest number of Delawareans.

But electric vehicles aren’t the only failed energy policy objective that is unrealistic and expensive. This past session the General Assembly passed the Delaware Energy Solutions Act that prioritizes procurement of offshore wind energy. Offshore wind is an intermittent energy source. That means it is not available all the time.  Any energy policy that relies on wind, or solar for that matter, must have provisions for the gaps in reliability these sources inherently have.

Offshore wind is expensive. When the legislature previously passed a bill that would require 25% off all the electricity used in Delaware to come from renewable sources, wind and solar, they put a 3% cap on any increase that customers could be required to pay as a result.  Currently, according to an analysis by the Caesar Rodney Institute, the cost is twice that to customers. In the past, a Governor’s Working Group on Offshore Wind found that offshore wind was simply too expensive.  The costs of offshore wind have not gone down since then.  So, what can we expect if this policy is implemented in Delaware? Higher costs for electric, huge subsidies for companies willing to put your money on the line when they take the risky venture to try to produce electric in offshore turbine fields, and uncertainty that our electric will be reliably available in the heat and cold.  Not much of a bargain.

Finally, with regard to offshore wind. The public needs to know that the Governor has signed an agreement with a company that has a commitment to provide electricity from an offshore wind farm to Maryland. The agreement is not for electricity. The agreement is to allow the company to bring four huge conduits of cables from the wind turbines ashore in our state park at 3Rs Road.  Why? Because no town or government in Mary land would agree to let them come ashore there. But our environmental concerns do not stop at the ocean’s edge. They also plan to transmit the electricity the turbines generate through those same conduits, buried only 3-7 feet deep, under the inland bay to property they bought adjacent to the Indian River Power Plant. There are opportunities to be heard on this issue. To submit your comments, go to: Public Comment Protocols – DNREC (delaware.gov).

Exercise your right to be heard about you concerns about the environment in our state, the health of our inland bays, the integrity of our beaches, and question why we would be willing to do something to bring electric to Maryland customers that no one in Maryland was willing to do.

Jane Brady serves as Chair of A Better Delaware. She previously served as Attorney General of Delaware and as a Judge of the Delaware Superior Court.

From Transparency to Quality: A Better Path for Delaware’s Health

By: Jane Brady, Chair, A Better Delaware

This is the first in a series of articles that will take a look at how the policy principles and legislative priorities of A Better Delaware fared in the last legislative session, which ended on June 30.  We have written over several years now about our perspective on healthcare, education, energy, the economy and workforce in Delaware, as well as the need for more accountability and better transparency in the way government works in Delaware. 

In this series, we will look at how the action the legislature took promotes or inhibits achievement of those policy objectives we feel are important to make Delaware a better place for families, workers, businesses and the community at large.

Healthcare Policy

Our principles at A Better Delaware regarding healthcare include promoting more competition, assuring better billing transparency and eliminating the obstacles to quality of care and lower costs.

The primary healthcare focus of the General Assembly and the Carney administration in this past legislative session was the cost to the State. Two primary initiatives addressed the state’s cost to provide health care to employees and retirees.

The first was HB 350, which placed a panel of 5 persons, selected through a political process, in a position of oversight of hospital budgets. While initially opposed by every hospital in the state, ultimately, the bill was amended slightly, and the hospitals were silent. The bill passed.

There are serious issues with this approach. The impact of a legislature prepared to put a political panel in charge of finance decisions in a private or non-profit business cannot be understated. During session, legislators were discussing what other businesses contract with the state and whether a financial review of their profits and spending choices might be appropriate.  Imagine a builder bids on a project and a panel of political appointees ask, “This price is awful high. How much compensation did you take home last year?”

The Governor was squarely behind this bill but should have appreciated the chilling effect this will have on new businesses locating in Delaware. And, when over a third of our revenue depends on our corporate friendly business climate, that impact can affect all of state services.

The second issue was the initiative to thwart the Governor’s plan to move retirees to a Medicare Advantage Plan from the current state health care plan.  There was a loud and effective resistance, and the General Assembly responded with a bill to prevent such a move. The Governor vetoed the bill, and in a rare, bi-partisan moment, the General Assembly voted to override the veto.

There are real shortcomings to the State’s approach to health care costs.  Rather than take an overall perspective of what procedures the state is covering, what contributions the insured are making, and whether those contributions are fair and comparable to what privately insured individuals pay as a portion of their premiums to employer plans for instance, Governor Carney determined to use a sledgehammer on hospital budgets and force retirees into an alternative plan to the one the state already provided

There are so many options the Administration did not advance or consider. First, pass along increases in health care as they occur. State insured individuals have never paid comparably to private employees. Everyone knows costs go up, and expects to pay more for healthcare, like every other commodity. Waiting until there is a dire need and imposing a huge increase all at once is not responsible management.

Second, remove the need for a certificate of need (now called a Certificate of Public Review in Delaware), which studies have repeatedly shown increase the costs of, and limit access to, health care.  That law requires that some of the very people who provide health care services in Delaware approve new facilities and services by their competitors. Why wouldn’t that restrict competition and limit options? The result?  The very same procedures can cost 30% less in neighboring states, that have competition.

The State should enforce and expand the laws we already have in place requiring transparency in billing and allow for patients to choose who provides their MRI, knee replacement or heart surgery. Costs vary widely between providers right here in Delaware, but patients cannot easily find the costs. It is expected, if you buy a couch or beef roast, that you will know the cost before you seal the deal. But you don’t know what a procedure will cost you before you undergo it. That does not make sense, particularly when there are differences in price between qualified providers.  The State could cut health care costs by providing that information to its insureds.

Finally, the State should take responsibility for the choices it makes regarding what procedures to cover, and for what amount.  At the very same hearing at which nearly $700,000 was appropriated for the costs of establishing the hospital budget review panel, the Committee voted to expand coverage to include all abortion and related services and to eliminate all copays for all such services, thereby increasing, in one vote, the costs to the state for health care insurance. Without comment on the subject that was covered, the reality is that you cannot continue to expand coverage without increasing costs, yet they did not, while in the same breath, blaming the hospitals for the high costs to the state for health care.

Jane Brady serves as Chair of A Better Delaware. She previously served as Attorney General of Delaware and as a Judge of the Delaware Superior Court.

Unlocking Education Freedom: A Call for Real Choices

By: Jane Brady, Chair, A Better Delaware

This week we celebrate freedom. Freedom from the oversight of a King far away. Freedom of speech, religion and assembly, and the other freedoms protected in the bedrock of our nation, our Constitution.

But we can celebrate no such freedom in education.  There are restrictions on our freedoms in education, outdated and unnecessary, intruding restrictions.

Think about it. The government does not tell you where you have to get your car fixed, but they do tell you where you have to send your child to school. Imagine if the mechanic you were assigned didn’t have all the parts you needed and some were delayed, but eventually you leave the garage with a car that performs at 50%. Sadly, many of our kids graduating high school in Delaware are not performing in reading and math at even 50%.

And this is not a new situation. For at least a decade, the academic performance of Delaware students has been declining.  Are these students any more prepared for the long journey of their careers, their lives, than a car that is operating at 50%?  Clearly, the quality of the journey is compromised.

So, what are our options?  As a parent, an employer or a customer, we all have an interest in a confident community. A community in which everyone can realize their potential, give and contribute to the well-being of others and find personal satisfaction from their life.  A sound education provides the foundation to make those objectives a reality.

How can your child break free of this system that is not serving them well? Currently, there are a few options.  If you have the means, you can choose to send your child to a private or parochial school. If you have the time, energy and skill, you can home school your children.  If you are lucky, your child can be selected in a lottery and attend a charter school. And you can apply to get your child transferred to a different public school. SchoolchoiceDE.org has all the specifics.  Of course, the deadline to apply for the 2024-2025 school year expired on January 10, 2024, so if you want to choose a different public school through the current choice program, be sure to plan quite far ahead!

Are you satisfied with these choices? Probably not.  Do they really give you the freedom to assure your child gets the best education for them? Definitely not.

We at A Better Delaware believe that parents should have real choices about where to send their kids to school. And there is a way to provide choice – Opportunity Scholarships.  Although not currently available in Delaware, these scholarships are provided either by the State, directly to the student’s choice of school, or through donations to a scholarship fund by individuals and businesses who would receive a portion of the amount they donate as a credit against the taxes they owe the State.

Pennsylvania has such a program to which businesses can donate, and which provides, among other things, tens of millions of dollars to low- and middle-income families to attend the school of their choice.  The program is so popular, there is a waiting list to donate.

The sad reality is that there are nearly a dozen schools in Delaware with academic performance in the single digits. That means, out of 100 students, fewer than 10 can read or do math at grade level.  Yet, the Department of Education recently reported that the State spends an average of over $20,000 per public school student per year. Delaware is in the top 10 states in the nation in spending, and yet we are 4th from the bottom in student academic performance.

That is not acceptable. Clearly the current education system, with the alternatives currently available, is not working for the students of Delaware. They deserve better. Parents deserve the opportunity to provide a better education for their children. Delaware deserves a better prepared, work- ready community of educated young people.

We have tried to just spend more, repeatedly, and that is clearly not the answer. A new alternative, Opportunity Scholarships, is needed to give the children of Delaware their best chance at success, not only in school, but in life.

Jane Brady serves as Chair of A Better Delaware. She previously served as Attorney General of Delaware and as a Judge of the Delaware Superior Court.