Lee Hagen and John Lund, West Fargo

Merrill Piepkorn, Fargo

North Dakota Senators will soon consider, among others, two bills passed in the House. HB 1540 would subsidize parents of all 7,986 private school K-12 students starting in the 2026-27 school year. The per pupil subsidy will be about $4,000 per student. There is no family income test for this taxpayer paid handout. Every family will qualify no matter how much income each family has. The cost is $40 million in 2026-27 and it increases to $80 million in 2027-28.

The other bill relevant to this is HB 1013. This is the Public Instruction bill, and it includes a state subsidy of $4.5 million to supplement the federal school lunch subsidy. Families with incomes up to $72,000 will qualify. Families with incomes over that amount will not qualify. Each qualifying family must submit a form stating what the family income is. Previously, the House defeated a bill which would have provided lunch for all students at a state cost of $140 million. The state portion would have been added to the federal funding.

One of the principal Republican arguments against school lunch for all is that taxpayer money should not be used to provide “free meals to students who have parents who can afford to feed them.”

So, how will our Senators vote? Will they vote for a subsidy for all private school students, no matter how much income each family has, and then vote for a school lunch bill which will pay for food for only some of the 118,334 public school students? That lunch is provided free to only those children whose parents can pass a means test.

If some Senators do vote this way, it will mean those Senators agree to contribute only $4.5 million to feed students, but are agreeable to the spending of $40 million (later $80 million) to pay for private education in nonpublic schools.

The private school bill will only benefit families who live close to a private school. Almost all of the private schools are located in the five largest cities in the state. This unequal treatment of people in rural areas is contrary to the bedrock governmental principle that laws should apply equally as possible to all citizens.

The third major objection to this legislation is that it includes a $3.5 million appropriation that will be deposited in the Office of Public Instruction to be used exclusively for promoting and advertising private schools in North Dakota.

We do not believe the State of North Dakota has ever used taxpayer money to promote any private enterprise of any kind. If there has been any such use of public money, we will stand corrected. Nevertheless, besides, this extremely unusual use of taxpayer money, there is a question whether this part of the bill is legal.

We have not even discussed the revolutionary principle of separation of church and state. This bill violates the spirit of that doctrine which has existed for 234 years. This indisputable fact is reason enough to defeat this measure.