James Madison Institute

Latest Episodes:

South Florida Sun Sentinel: Florida Policymakers Should Embrace Micro-Education Dec 27, 2022

December 25, 2022

In the wake of COVID, a “new normal” in K-12 education is taking hold. Public school enrollment is down in most parts of the country. Homeschooling numbers remain well above their pre-pandemic levels (especially among African Americans). The same is true for virtual learning, where some innovative new programs using immersive technology are winning critical acclaim. And small, highly personalized learning communities — such as micro-schools, learning pods, and hybrid homeschools — are continuing to draw considerable interest from young families.

Many families are drawn to these emerging enterprises because they like smaller, more personalized environments. They want curriculum tailored to the individual child’s interests, needs and learning styles. And they appreciate the fact that their child can more easily get extra attention in certain subjects — while often gaining exposure to cutting-edge technology.

For example, the Florida-based Optima Foundation has produced the first-ever classical curriculum using immersive technology. It allows students, wearing virtual reality headsets, to be transported to ancient Rome to witness debates between leading philosophers. With immersive technology of this kind, it matters not whether the student is engaging educational content from a large classroom in Broward County or a small out-building in Glades County. As such, immersive technology helps fuel the growing “learn anywhere” movement.

Interestingly, an increasing number of educators share parents’ enthusiasm for “micro” options. They have rediscovered the joy of teaching, free from the often-stifling regulations of big school bureaucracies, by moving into the “micro” sector as education entrepreneurs. South Florida, in particular, has become a “large hub of education entrepreneurship,” according to scholar Kerry McDonald.

These alternative forms of education “are here to stay,” McDonald says, in large part because of their “educational diversity.”

“Today’s micro-schools,” she writes, “represent all ideological and political persuasions, embrace a variety of educational philosophies and approaches, and use a wide assortment of curriculum resources and learning tools, including, in some instances, standardized tests and traditional curriculum.” This diversity means today’s “micro” movement is “less apt to fade with changing cultural or political trends,” according to McDonald.

Speaking of diversity, many families are finding school choice to be the best solution to some of the divisive conflicts in K-12 education that have arisen in recent years. For example, during the fall of 2021, several public school districts sought to defy Florida’s prohibition on mask mandates in public schools. Gov. Ron DeSantis responded by offering Hope Scholarships to students harassed by local school officials over masks. But in a move that many national media outlets completely overlooked, DeSantis also authorized Hope Scholarship assistance for families uncomfortable with sending their children to mask-optional public schools.

As such, Florida gave all families the opportunity to enroll their child in a school that shared their masking preferences. Rather than perpetuating a high-stakes, zero-sum battle in which only one side could get its way, Florida found a way to accommodate the concerns of families with very different needs, preferences and convictions. The key to this accommodation? School choice.

In many ways, the emergence of a post-COVID “new normal” should not surprise anyone. Parents have long expressed broad support for school choice policies. And roughly four out of five parents now support flexible-use scholarships commonly known as Education Savings Accounts. With ESAs, families can patch together courses from multiple providers (including virtual programs) rather than relying on a single school to meet all of their children’s learning needs. As such, ESAs are particularly beneficial to families interested in smaller, more customized forms of education. And they should be made more widely available to families by Florida policymakers.

“What we’re hearing from parents loud and clear is they feel a greater sense of ownership over their child’s education,” says polling analyst Christian Lehr of Tyton Partners. “We must work hard to connect families with a broader set of learning opportunities and provide them the resources and tools necessary to take action.”

Originally found in South Florida Sun Sentinel.

The post South Florida Sun Sentinel: Florida Policymakers Should Embrace Micro-Education appeared first on James Madison Institute.

Forbes: Washington Gridlock Will Put States At The Forefront Of Tech Policy In 2023 Dec 21, 2022

Roslyn Layton
December 20, 2022

The midterm election spawned a new political reality and configuration in Washington D.C., letting states will take the lead in technology policy as gridlock dominates Congress. The shift in power from Washington means peril or promise, depending on how lawmakers approach questions around technology. With trifecta control now the norm in state capitols across the country, fewer barriers to passing legislation, and less oversight, good and bad policy will inevitably slip under the radar, despite the national consequences. Edward Longe, Director of the Center for Tech and Innovation at the James Madison Institute and Doctoral Candidate in US History explains the developments data privacy, app stores, right to repair, content moderation, and cybersecurity.

Layton: What do the midterms mean for tech policy?

Longe: By design, Congress is a sclerotic institution. Of the 17,148 bills introduced between January 3rd, 2021, and the 2022 midterm elections, only 632 (4 percent) became law. Such an abysmal track record occurred despite the Democrats holding a trifecta – controlling both chambers of Congress and the White House. After Republicans recaptured the House from 2022 midterm elections and expressed greater interest in oversight, it’s almost certain that fewer bills – except must-pass spending and defense bills – will make it to the President’s desk.

In 2023, 39 states will likely have trifectas, meaning fewer legislative barriers exist to a bill’s passage. Instead of needing bipartisan support, a piece of legislation being considered in a state with a trifecta only needs the backing of the majority party and the governor. These reduced legislative barriers make it likely, given the gridlock in Congress, that many states will take the lead in creating the regulatory environment governing technology and innovation. Technology’s ability to transcend state borders means the decisions taken in state capitols will have national ramifications.

The Republican recapture of the House of Representatives and Democrat control of the Senate means that a federal data standard that has enjoyed bipartisan support will struggle to gain traction. California Democrats demand that any federal statute should follow California’s Consumer Privacy Act or the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation. Many Policy analysts have widely criticized these laws, noting reduced freedom of choice for consumers and increased costs on enterprise with compliance and litigation.

With Congressional Republicans and Democrats so far apart on the issue, state legislatures will inevitably step in and fill the void. So far California, Virginia, Connecticut, Colorado, and Utah have passed data laws, all of which were under a Republican or Democratic trifecta. With a record number of states under trifecta control after the November midterms, it seems likely that, given constituent demands, more states will consider their own data privacy requirements.

While necessary in the absence of congressional action, this new trend will further entrench the 50-state patchwork that raises costs for businesses and leaves millions without appropriate data protections. In an age when lives are increasingly taking place online, this presents a treacherous digital situation for Americans who will find their zip code determining the level of protection, and businesses will face increased compliance costs and an uneven regulatory environment.

Layton: What are other developments do you see with tech policy at the state level?

Longe: Some state legislatures, guided by hostility to large technology companies, could pass misguided bills to regulating safety of app store and complicated “right to repair” rules between consumers and manufacturers. Largely driven by the populist streak dominating political discourse, these bills will leave consumers vulnerable to bad actors and destroy digital ecosystems that have generated substantial value for American consumers. Just one state passing one of these bills, supported by a handful of lawmakers in the majority party, could cause real damage to all Americans and the tech and innovation sector. That’s before considering content moderation bills that while constitutionally questionable are increasingly popular in both parties. Some Republicans claim conservatives have been censored by social media platforms; some Democrats want tech platforms to combat “misinformation” and “hate speech.”

Layton: Other the other hand, it could be that state policy signals viable solutions to Congress. Moreover, we have seen that people vote with their feet, moving to the state whose policies they prefer, for example Florida.

Longe: Despite the perils of states driving technology policy, they are petri dishes of good policy. Multiple state governments have shown substantial interest in creating sandboxes that provide greater regulatory freedom to provide citizens with innovative goods and services. Additionally, as the Federal Bureau of Investigation noting that cybersecurity attacks on the risk, state governments have the opportunity to pass bipartisan legislation, following Florida’s lead, that prohibits the use of state funds for purchase of equipment from adversaries, mandates reporting, invests in training programs, curbs the use of technology from hostile nations, and prohibits state agencies and municipalities from paying ransom to cybercriminals.

If state governments ultimately pass these measures, it would create an environment that embraces innovation and enhances security which will ultimately benefit every American.

Roslyn Layton analyzes international technology policy through business economics. EVP, Strand Consult; Co-Founder, ChinaTechThreat; Visiting Researcher, Department of Electronic Systems, Aalborg University. Focus on US, EU and China policy.

Originally found on Forbes.

The post Forbes: Washington Gridlock Will Put States At The Forefront Of Tech Policy In 2023 appeared first on James Madison Institute.

Spill the Tea- Episode 33 Dec 15, 2022

On the latest episode of Spill the Tea, JMI’s Dr. Bob McClure and guest host Logan Padgett discuss Florida’s special session on property insurance reform. Will your property insurance bill be going down anytime soon? Other items discussed are a new discount on tolls for commuters, the announcement by DeSantis to seek a grand jury to investigate Covid-19 vaccines, Hurricane Ian and Nicole’s effects on the orange grove industry and beehives in Florida.

The post Spill the Tea- Episode 33 appeared first on James Madison Institute.

Statement from The James Madison Institute on the Passage of the Property Insurance Reform Dec 15, 2022

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

December 14, 2022

CONTACT
Logan Elizabeth Padgett
850-386-3131

Statement from The James Madison Institute on the Passage of the Property Insurance Reform

With today’s passage of sensible and meaningful reforms, Florida policymakers have taken a huge step forward in restoring sanity to our property insurance market. For too many years homeowners have been held hostage to the abuses of Florida’s tort system. Those abuses have made the state a haven for fraudsters making fortunes taking advantage of homeowners. Policymakers can’t change Florida’s geography or our storm prevalence. They can, however, ensure that the insurance market reflects the risks of storms and damage, rather than the risks of fraud and lawsuit abuse. And to that end, they have succeeded.

The James Madison Institute thanks Speaker Paul Renner, President Kathleen Passidomo, and legislative leaders who shepherded complicated policy deftly.

The post Statement from The James Madison Institute on the Passage of the Property Insurance Reform appeared first on James Madison Institute.

The FTC Declares War On Innovation Dec 14, 2022

When Lina M. Kahn, Associate Professor of Law at Columbia University, was sworn in as Chair of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), she pledged to “protect the public from corporate abuse.” Unfortunately, in fulfilling this promise, the FTC has turned an increasingly skeptical eye toward mergers and acquisitions, arguing they hurt competitors, the marketplace, and consumers. Aside from the fact that antitrust law has traditionally focused on consumer harm, this increased hostility at the FTC over mergers and acquisitions will disrupt the innovative technology ecosystem that generates significant benefits for American consumers. In disrupting this ecosystem, Chair Kahn’s FTC has declared war on innovation, American consumers, and the competitive marketplace that rewards success.

Recently, the FTC has intervened in pro-consumer business activities by seeking to block two acquisitions involving Microsoft and Meta, the parent company of Facebook. These interventions are unsurprising given public and political vitriol directed toward large technology companies, and Chair Kahn’s public embrace of a “big is bad” approach to antitrust enforcement.

Antitrust enforcement has centered around two competing visions. The first, which traces its origins back to the progressive era, assumes the existence of big companies always harm competition, markets, and consumer interests. Such an approach, colloquially known as “big is bad,” has influenced recent legislative proposals, such as the American Innovation and Choice Online Act, the Open App Markets Act, the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act, and the Platform Competition and Opportunity Act. This approach has gained new traction with the neo-brandeis movement, which is similarly hostile to large companies but seeks to inject public interest into the debate, forcing courts to consider “a variety of social and political goals,” not just consumers or competition.

The competing vision of antitrust enforcement is the consumer welfare standard, articulated by Robert Bork and later adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court. Under the consumer welfare standard, “business conduct and mergers are evaluated to determine whether they harm consumers in any relevant market. Generally speaking, if consumers are not harmed, the antitrust agencies do not act.” For example, the consumer welfare standard guided the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division to approve airline mergers in the early 2000s. Specifically, it became clear to regulators that larger airlines could create efficiencies “in airport operations, information technology, supply chain economics, and fleet optimization that will benefit consumers” through lower ticket prices.

Deferring to the dated big is bad approach to antitrust enforcement, FTC recently announced its intention to block Microsoft’s $69 billion purchase of Activision, creator of the popular Call of Duty series. The FTC expressed concern that “Microsoft would have both the means and motive to harm competition by manipulating Activision’s pricing, degrading Activision’s game quality or player experience on rival consoles and gaming services, changing the terms and timing of access to Activision’s content, or withholding content from competitors entirely, resulting in harm to consumers.” These concerns existed despite a promise from Microsoft to make Call of Duty available to rivals Sony and Nintendo under a legally enforceable agreement.

Additionally, the FTC is seeking to block Meta’s acquisition of Within, the developer of Supernatural, a popular virtual reality fitness application. In its lawsuit, the agency argued, “Meta is trying to buy its way to the top” instead of competing. Since announcing its opposition to the acquisition, the FTC has since narrowed its complaint, acknowledging that Meta and Within Unlimited are not direct competitors. Similarly to the case against Microsoft, the FTC is grounding its case in speculation and an outdated ideology that reflexively assumes big business is bad.

For businesses, especially start-ups, mergers and acquisitions provide an attractive and profitable exit strategy that could be closed off if the FTC’s recent enforcement efforts are successful. Studies have routinely shown that most new companies, 58 percent, expect to be acquired by a larger company, and that acquisition is a principal reason for establishing a start-up. Removing this incentive by seeking to block mergers in federal court will ultimately result in entrepreneurs launching fewer companies, depressing innovation, and denying consumers access to the next generation of goods and services.

For a federal agency whose mission statement centers around protecting consumers, denying them the next generation of goods and services and depressing innovation should be an anathema.

Hostility toward mergers and acquisitions also creates uncertainty for businesses, especially those that expect to be acquired or are being acquired by larger companies. Fearing unnecessary interference from the FTC and the massive legal bills associated with defending these deals in court, businesses will face a choice. Either they will have to pull out of deals that spur innovation, competition, and growth or divert funding from research and development into paying expensive lawyers. In both instances, consumers lose out, and innovation suffers. These effects will be particularly pronounced among smaller businesses with less capital to meet the financial obligations of dealing with hostile antitrust enforcers.

Despite unfounded fears that mergers and acquisitions harm consumers, the economic reality is that they generate substantial benefits for consumers by lowering prices, allowing greater integration of products, developing economies of scale, expanding consumer access, and increasing research and development funding. Such benefits underpin the consumer welfare standard and the philosophy that has made the U.S. one of the most dynamic and innovative economies.

Since shifting its attention away from Facebook, once the world’s largest social media platform, and onto immersive technology, Meta has acquired nine virtual reality applications and spent over $31 billion on developing the metaverse. Such acquisitions and investments have allowed the products of small companies to be improved, scaled, and made widely available to consumers. Such investments have not only made immersive technology a consumer good when it was previously confined to the realms of science fiction, it has also allowed the company to produce an overall better product.

Microsoft’s acquisition of smaller companies has also resulted in significant benefits for Americans. For example, in 2011, the tech giant acquired Skype for $8.5 billion. At the time, the platform had around 840 million users. After purchasing Skype, Microsoft integrated the software into its devices, gaming consoles, and email suite. Such integration has made it easier for consumers to connect with friends and family. As a result, Skype now has over 2 billion users worldwide.

In both instances, acquisitions by large technology companies have resulted in tangible benefits for American consumers that would have been denied had the FTC been guided by its present hostility toward mergers and acquisitions.

Despite the clear benefits of mergers and acquisitions, the FTC’s desire to prevent Microsoft from acquiring Activision and Meta from purchasing Within shows they are more interested in kowtowing to an outdated antitrust ideology than meeting its mission of protecting consumers. In doing so, they are disincentivizing entrepreneurs from building, creating unnecessary legal uncertainty, and undermining transactions that have technology more accessible. Unfortunately, with Chair Kahn leading the FTC, it’s unlikely the agency will see the error of its ways and embrace the philosophy that has created one of the most innovative economies on the planet.

In the end, though, consumers lose out.

The post The FTC Declares War On Innovation appeared first on James Madison Institute.

Florida Leads the Nation in Immersive Technology Dec 13, 2022

Despite only being widely available to consumers in the past few years, immersive technology has been around since 1968 when Ivan Sutherland and Bob Sproull released the world’s first virtual reality headset, The Sword of Damocles. While groundbreaking for a society that was 14 years away from the creation of the internet and twenty-nine years away from the invention of Wi-Fi, Sutherland and Sproull’s headset was primitive by today’s standards, only able to “show simple virtual wire-frame shapes” and had to be physically connected to a computer.

Today, however, immersive technology can make video games feel like reality. Simulations can, put students at the heart of historical events such as the signing of the Declaration of Independence or the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius, and allow Americans to see the outstanding natural beauty of their national parks without having to leave the comfort of their homes. As Juan Londoño of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation states, “the development of immersive technology over the past decade has allowed us to push the boundaries of possibility, and create experiences that were once the realm of science fiction.” He continued, noting that “the possibilities for immersive technology are endless, and often only limited by human imagination.”

While immersive technology has limitless potential, its current and potential value for training the next generation of workers can not be overstated. Traditionally, employees are trained in a classroom environment in theoretical scenarios that may not reflect reality or the complexity of real-world situations. Immersive technology, however, has disrupted this orthodoxy, allowing for
training in real-world situations, giving individuals the ability to practice their craft in a controlled, but realistic, environment. As Anastasia Morozova, Chief Operating Officer of Jasoren, a US software development company specializing in building virtual and augmented reality applications for workforce development headquartered in Miami notes, immersive technology “enables companies to create scenarios in which team members can learn how to avoid negative consequences at their work by applying their theoretical knowledge in virtual environments. This lets them safely make mistakes and then make correct conclusions.”

These benefits are not just abstract conjectures, but are seen every day by companies that use immersive technology to train their workforces. According to John Cunningham, Head of Unity Government & Aerospace, “Skanska, one of the world’s largest construction companies implemented highly realistic VR scenarios into its worker-safety training program for better awareness and fewer accidents.” As a result, “onsite workers are 73 percent more aware of site risks after completing VR training on operating construction equipment and risky procedures.”

Imagine a world where a heart surgeon can practice complex surgeries multiple times without endangering a patient’s life. Imagine allowing firefighters to train in fighting fires without putting them in a burning building. Imagine allowing workers at nuclear power plants the opportunity to train in crisis response without the risk of a nuclear meltdown that could cost thousands of lives or cause an environmental catastrophe.

All this is possible when immersive technology is used to train workers.

With Florida’s long history of entertainment, space exploration, and significant investments from the Department of Defense, the Sunshine State has become a national and international leader in immersive technology. Those who are using immersive technology to help train the next generation of workers also cite this history and the light-touch regulatory agenda of the state legislature as providing the necessary space for innovators to innovate and entrepreneurs to build. Such a light-touch regulatory agenda in Florida is contrasted with states such as New York and California whose burdensome regulations are forcing innovators to flee to more hospitable regulatory climates.

One of Florida’s best examples of the commitment to progress in this arena is a joint project between the Orlando Economic Partnership and software developer Unity, the world’s leading platform for creating and growing interactive, real-time 3D (RT3D) content. Both organizations have digitally recreated 800 square miles of central Florida. Known as a digital twin, this digital recreation is the first of its kind to recreate such an expansive space that can be updated in real-time and will allow “investors, companies, local governments, and nonprofits to visualize how their own plans will impact the region” as well as train their workforces more effectively. While the potential uses for Orlando’s digital twin are endless, interested users include power companies who are finding better ways to respond to power outages, restore power, and lay electric cables. Beyond training workers and finding more efficient ways of operating, Orlando’s digital twin can also be used to show potential workers and university students the Florida lifestyle, providing a competitive advantage to attracting the best workers and students from
across the country.

Beyond Orlando’s digital twin, Pensacola State College is employing immersive technology to train the next generation of healthcare professionals. Rather than learning from a textbook, immersive technology is allowing medical students to experience a range of situations from beach rescues to treating patients in the confines of an ambulance in a controlled environment. Such opportunities allow the next generation of healthcare professionals to practice multiple complex situations, correct mistakes and ultimately deliver better outcomes for future patients. Studies have also shown that the use of immersive technology can significantly lower the cost of training healthcare workers, allowing more providers to enter space and reducing barriers for individuals seeking to become healthcare professionals but who are excluded by high tuition fees.

Orlando’s digital twin and Pensacola State College provide the clearest evidence of how Florida is leading the way in employing immersive technology to enhance workforce training. The result of deploying immersive technology in this way will be a better-trained workforce who have greater experience in real-world scenarios and complex scenarios, not fictitious creations that fail to reflect the real world.. Having such a highly trained workforce allows Florida to cement its status as a national and global economic powerhouse and innovation hub.

Such benefits, however, can only be achieved if the state legislature and regulatory agencies continue pushing for a light-touch regulatory landscape that provides the space for innovators to innovate and create new uses for immersive technology.

The post Florida Leads the Nation in Immersive Technology appeared first on James Madison Institute.

What Are Florida’s School Choice Scholarships? Dec 13, 2022

The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated a national exodus from public schools, with parents opting for private schools, homeschooling, and other alternative K-12 education methods. It also gave rise to support for school choice, an umbrella term for policies that allow families to send their students to alternatives to public schools. These can include charter schools, private schools, magnet school, learning pods, and homeschooling costs.

School choice isn’t limited to simply allowing kids to attend schools they aren’t assigned to based on zip codes. It includes letting parents subsidize the costs of the alternatives with the taxpayer funds that normally would’ve financed their child’s education at a public school. This is usually in the form of individual tax credits, scholarships, school vouchers, and education savings accounts (ESAs).

That may be why so many people have moved to Florida since 2020. Florida is considered one of the best states for school choice along with Arizona, which has adopted universal school choice, meaning all students have access to public funds for alternatives. The Heritage Foundation ranked Florida the best state for education in its Educational Freedom Report Card and No. 3 for school choice.

Florida has four school choice scholarships, each of which has certain conditions that students have to meet in order to be taken advantage of. Not every student in the state can have public education funding follow them out of their assigned district school. The scholarships are administered by scholarship-funding organizations, known as SFOs. The largest SFO is Step Up for Students, which funds all four programs.

Navigating the different options can be difficult for Florida parents who may not understand the various intricacies, so here is a basic layout of each of the main options.

The Florida Tax Credit Scholarship

Florida’s oldest and most popular school choice scholarship is the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship, known as the FTC Scholarship. It was launched in 2001, and EdChoice estimates that more than 85,000 students utilized FTC Scholarships in the 2021-2022 school year.

Students are eligible if they come from households that make less than 3.75 times the federal poverty level (roughly $111,000 for a family of four) have siblings in their household are current recipients, are in foster care, or are dependents of active-duty military.

The average scholarship award is $6,815. SFOs give the award directly to parents for tuition and fees or transportation if they decide to send their child to a different public school.

Florida taxpayers can contribute to eligible SFOs and receive a dollar-for-dollar tax credit for taxes like the corporate income tax, insurance premium tax, and the excise tax.

Family Empowerment Scholarship for Educational Options

Florida’s only voucher program is the Family Empowerment Scholarship for Educational Options, sometimes called the Educational Opportunity Voucher.

It was created in 2019 to increase school choice access for those who aren’t able to access the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship. Students are eligible if they come from households that make less than 3.75 times the federal poverty level (roughly $111,000 for a family of four), receive food assistance like SNAP, are in foster care, have a parent in the military, or have a sibling who is already participating in the program.

As a voucher program, students are awarded a certain amount of dollars that are redeemable at participating schools. The average voucher amount awarded is $7,300, with nearly 75,000 students participating. So if a student who qualifies wants to attend a private school with a tuition of $10,000 and receives a $7,500 voucher, the family would present the voucher to the school and only have to pay $2,500 out of pocket.

The Family Empowerment Scholarship for Students with Unique Abilities

A school choice education savings account (ESA) is an account that receives public funds to be used on educational expenses like tuition, tutoring, and even learning materials. It’s different from a Coverdell ESA or 529 savings plan because families don’t deposit their own funds into the account; the government does.

Florida’s only ESA is the Family Empowerment Scholarship for Students with Unique Abilities (FES-UA), often referred to as the Unique Abilities ESA. It is different from the FES-EO because it’s for students with disabilities or special needs and is an ESA rather than a voucher.

Students are eligible if they are diagnosed with certain disabilities, have some sort of impairment, or have an Individualized Education Plan, known as an IEP. These IEPs are developed by teachers, parents, and school administrators to measure the progress of the special needs students.

Eligible disabilities include down syndrome, cerebral palsy, learning disabilities, rare diseases, and more. Eligible impairments include conditions like deafness, blindness, brain injuries, or developmental issues.

In 2022, it integrated the McKay Scholarship Program for Students with Disabilities, which was given to 30,000 students with special needs who attend private schools. It was also known as the Gardiner Scholarship Program before 2021.

Hope Scholarship

Florida’s other tax-credit scholarship is the Hope Scholarship. It’s the first of its kind program because it is targeted to students who are victims of bullying.

Students can be from any income background; they only have to be victims of violence, intimidation, hazing, or sexual assault where the incidences occured on their public school property or at a school-affiliated activity, including on the bus or at a bus stop.

There are two ways the scholarship can be used. The first is like the FTC scholarship. Families receive a scholarship (the average Hope Scholarship is $7,700) that is sent directly to the alternative school they want to send their child to.

The other option is to attend a different public school, one the child isn’t assigned to based on their zip code. The scholarship can be used to cover at least $750 in transportation costs.

The scholarship has a unique funding mechanism. When someone buys a car in Florida, they can have up to $105 of their sales tax be directed to funding Hope Scholarships.

Conclusion

Overall, Florida is on the right track to maintain its position as the nation’s leader for school choice. It should follow Arizona and adopt universal school choice, making it possible for all students to use the education option that best suits their needs. After all, the purpose of public education funds is to fund the student’s education — not the education system.

The post What Are Florida’s School Choice Scholarships? appeared first on James Madison Institute.

James Madison Institute Releases 2023 Sunshine State Priorities Dec 12, 2022

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

December 12, 2022

CONTACT: Logan Elizabeth Padgett

850-386-3131

JAMES MADISON INSTITUTE RELEASES 2023 POLICY PRIORITIES

With the economic freedom and prosperity we enjoy here, the Florida experiment is clearly working. Together, we have won many victories for limited government, economic prosperity and liberty, but there is still much to be done.

Today, The James Madison Institute released its 2023 Sunshine State Policy Priorities, which detail a robust and visionary set of initiatives for the next year that reinforce our principles of limited government and economic liberty.

“The 2022 election provided a clarion call for Florida – full steam ahead. With overwhelming victories across the board for conservatives in the Sunshine State, there is nothing short of a mandate for the types of policy reforms that have been the hallmark of the past 20 years. We look forward to working with Governor DeSantis, Speaker Renner, President Passidomo, and legislative leaders in both chambers to continue making Florida the blueprint for 49 other states.” — Sal Nuzzo, Vice President of Policy

“It’s time for Florida policymakers to adopt a New A+ Plan for K-12 Education — flexible-use scholarships for all Florida students (that’s the A) with weighted funding for special populations, including those living in Title I neighborhoods (that’s the Plus). Adopting a new A+ Plan for K-12 Education would provide universal coverage for all students, real choices for families that lack them, and new ways to stimulate “positive neighborhood effects” in disadvantaged communities. Moreover, Florida policymakers should seek to have the weighted funding come from Washington, by calling upon the U.S. Congress to reform the Title I program so that it funds students rather than school systems.” — William Mattox, Director of the J. Stanley Marshall Center for Educational Options, The James Madison Institute

“With resounding majorities in both chambers of Florida’s legislature, I am optimistic that 2023 will be a year to press ahead full steam to show the rest of the country that Florida’s success is not a flash in the pan. It is a direct result of consistent, conservative, market-friendly policies that place a value on economic liberty for all.” — Dr. Victor Claar, Adjunct Director of the George Gibbs Center for Economic Prosperity

“As New York and California reject innovators and entrepreneurs by imposing high taxes and burdensome regulations, Florida has the opportunity to position itself as a national and global technology hub. Through these policy recommendations, we firmly believe the legislature, the executive, and state agencies will continue to be able to reaffirm their commitment to a light-touch regulatory agenda, free markets, and consumer protections. In doing so, we also believe they will ensure Floridians, regardless of where they call home, will be able to reap the economic and social benefits technology and innovation provides.” — Edward Longe, Director of the Center for Technology and Innovation, The James Madison Institute

To read “2023 Sunshine State Priorities,” click here.

###

The James Madison Institute is a 501(c)3 organization dedicated to the ideals of limited government, economic freedom, federalism and individual liberty coupled with individual responsibility. The institute conducts research on such issues as criminal justice, health care, taxes and regulatory environments.

The post James Madison Institute Releases 2023 Sunshine State Priorities appeared first on James Madison Institute.

**2023 Sunshine State Priorities** Dec 12, 2022
For tens of millions of Americans, day-to-day reality has been a roller coaster of catastrophic events and economic tumult. From 9/11 to Middle East wars to the financial sector collapse to the Great Recession to COVID and the economic times of the present – there seems to be little progress toward anything resembling normalcy. In all of this, Americans know two things – it was not the way our founders intended us to be, and that Washington politicians and bureaucrats are wholly incapable of fixing what years of neglect of the founding principles have wrought.

**The state of Florida stands apart as a contrast to that reality and presents the vital alternative – freedom, opportunity, and economic liberty for all.**

The James Madison Institute, Florida’s leading think tank in America’s most influential state, is at the tip of the spear in the fight for freedom. In both cementing progress for Floridians and serving as the north star for 49 other states in desperate need of idea leadership, our purpose is to advance ideas that make Florida the best place to live, work, and raise a family. From entrepreneurs starting and expanding businesses, to parents tailoring education settings to best fit their children, to everyday Floridians interacting with their healthcare providers – the ideas we champion protect and advance opportunity and prosperity here and offer a path to export these cherished ideals beyond Florida’s borders.

As the rest of the nation looks to the Sunshine State, we present our 2023 Policy Priorities – a vision of policy success anchored in five pillars of Florida Success.

Click here to read the 2023 Sunshine State Policy Priorities.

The post 2023 Sunshine State Priorities appeared first on James Madison Institute.

Florida Politics: Florida needs a new A+ Plan in K-12 education Dec 08, 2022

William Mattox
December 7, 2022

Some Florida families have yet to benefit directly from school choice.

More than 20 years ago, Florida adopted an A+ Plan for K-12 Education, under the leadership of Gov. Jeb Bush. This ambitious initiative, which included Florida’s first K-12 scholarship program, proved to be an extraordinary success. It helped establish Florida as a national leader in student outcomes.

And it inspired many other states to adopt similar reforms.

While the impact of that original A+ Plan has been incredibly far-reaching, some Florida families have yet to benefit directly from school choice — or to benefit fully from all that a skillfully-crafted education choice policy could bring.

Consider:

— Some students remain ineligible for scholarships, even though their parents pay taxes and the state will fund their education if they attend a public school.

— Some families have education choices only in theory. They qualify for scholarships, but this doesn’t have much practical benefit because current vouchers can only be used for school tuition — and they live in a sparsely-populated area that does not have any alternative schools.

— Some scholarship recipients living in disadvantaged communities continue to suffer from what Harvard scholar Raj Chetty calls a dearth of “positive neighborhood effects.” For these students, the primary challenge isn’t access to meaningful school choice — it is overcoming the residual effects of assigned school policies on neighborhood composition.

Thus, a New A+ Plan is needed — and it should be designed to provide universal coverage for all students, real choices for families that lack them, and new opportunities for those living in disadvantaged neighborhoods. Specifically, Florida’s New A+ Plan for K-12 Education should offer flexible-use scholarships to all Florida families (that’s the A) with weighted funding for special populations, including those living in Title I neighborhoods that need revitalization (that’s the Plus).

Such a policy would be especially well-suited for today’s post-COVID “new normal,” in which many parents are exploring new ways to educate their children. Indeed, scholar Kerry McDonald reports that small, highly-personalized learning communities — such as micro-schools, learning pods and hybrid home-schools — continue to draw considerable interest from young families.

This interest in “micro” education offers promise to sparsely populated areas in particular. “In many smaller communities, the absence of good K-12 schooling options is a major problem,” reports real estate professor Bart Danielsen of North Carolina State University. “It not only hinders economic development and job growth, but it also adversely affects things like rural hospitals’ ability to attract and retain good doctors.”

Danielsen says household migration studies show that “families prefer to live in locations where school choice programs are offered, and they will move to these places” as circumstances allow. Perhaps the best example of this comes from rural Vermont, where families with school-aged children often opt to live in “tuitioning districts” (offering school choice scholarships) over districts with assigned public schools.

Danielsen’s research points to an often-overlooked benefit of school choice — it can help localities attract and/or retain upwardly-mobile residents that significantly contribute to the life of the community. And the long-term effects of such policies could be even more powerful if state policymakers were to make scholarship programs more flexible.

Indeed, universal Education Savings Accounts (ESAs) allow families to patch together educational offerings from multiple providers (including online courses and highly innovative immersive technology programs) rather than relying on a single school to meet all their child’s learning needs. As such, ESAs are particularly beneficial to families in geographic areas that lack (large) school options.

“School choice programs can improve communities and spark economic vitality,” Danielsen says. And when scholarships become available to all families everywhere, “enhanced benefits” should be offered to families living in lower-income neighborhoods needing revitalization.

Weighted scholarships of this kind could be provided easily by transforming the federal government’s Title I education assistance program into one that funds students rather than school systems. And it would be fitting for weighted funds to come from the Title I program since many of the low-income neighborhoods we see today were adversely affected by the federal government’s “redlining” policies from the mid-20th century.

More than two decades ago, Florida’s original A+ Plan for Education started our state down the school choice path. A New A+ Plan for Florida Education would enable us to reach our destination — providing scholarship eligibility to all students, while retaining our state’s special concern for families facing difficult circumstances.

Originally found in Florida Politics.

The post Florida Politics: Florida needs a new A+ Plan in K-12 education appeared first on James Madison Institute.