z63\doc\web\2003\02\hb1568.txt WASL NEEDED FOR DRIVERS LICENCE By Representatives Talcott, Quall, Anderson, Rockefeller, Holmquist, Miloscia, Hunter, Tom, Delvin, Shabro, Ericksen, Sump, Lantz, Chase, Campbell, Nixon, Alexander, Sullivan, Skinner, Simpson, Kristiansen, Bush and Berkey Read first time 02/05/2003. Referred to Committee on Education. AN ACT Relating to linking success on academic assessments to driving privileges for persons under eighteen years of age; amending RCW 46.20.031, 46.20.091, and 46.20.100; reenacting and amending RCW 46.20.055; adding new sections to chapter 46.20 RCW; and creating a new section. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON: NEW SECTION. Sec. (1) The legislature finds that: (a) The challenges our citizens face in the twenty-first century will require that students attain increasingly rigorous academic standards; (b) Middle and high school students, who face countless distractions and conflicting messages, need meaningful incentives to make academic achievement a higher priority in their lives; (c) For middle school and high school students, earning a driver's license is one of the accomplishments that they value most highly; (d) Research indicates a strong correlation between a student's academic achievement and safe driving habits; and (e) For students under the age of eighteen, driving is a privilege that must be earned and a student's responsibility is to become a successful student before learning to become a successful driver. (2) Therefore, the legislature intends to increase the attention of middle and high school students on their academic responsibilities by requiring the students to successfully complete an assessment of their reading and writing skills before they obtain a driver's license. NEW SECTION. Sec. A new section is added to chapter 46.20 RCW to read as follows: (1) In addition to other statutory requirements, beginning July 1, 2006, a person under eighteen years of age shall meet the following conditions in order to apply for or receive a state driver's instruction permit, driver's license, intermediate driver's license, or motorcycle endorsement: (a) A person who does not meet the characteristics in (b) of this subsection shall demonstrate successful completion of both the reading and writing assessments on one of the following: The seventh, eighth, or high school Washington assessment of student learning. (b) A person who is enrolled in a private school approved under chapter 28A.195 RCW or an education clinic under chapter 28A.205 RCW, or who is engaged in home-based instruction under chapter 28A.200 RCW, shall demonstrate successful completion of the reading and writing assessments on one of the assessments in (a) of this subsection or on a comparably rigorous assessment from a list of assessments, with required performance levels, identified by the academic achievement and accountability commission. (2) Juvenile agricultural driving permits are not subject to these requirements. NEW SECTION. Sec. A new section is added to chapter 46.20 RCW to read as follows: (1) Beginning on July 1, 2006, before accepting an application from or issuing a driver's instruction permit, driver's license, intermediate driver's license, or motorcycle endorsement to a person under eighteen years of age, the department shall obtain documentation that indicates that the applicant has met the requirements of section 2 of this act. (2) At the request of the parent or guardian of a person under eighteen years of age, a school district, private school, or education clinic shall transmit to the department a document that demonstrates whether the applicant has met the requirements of section 2 of this act. (3) A parent or guardian of a person under eighteen years of age in home-based instruction shall provide to the department a document that demonstrates whether the applicant has met the requirements of section 2 of this act. (4) By June 30, 2004, the office of the superintendent of public instruction shall develop and make available transmittal documents for the purposes of sections 2 and 3 of this act, including documents that may be transmitted electronically, for use by school districts, private schools, education clinics, and parents in home- based instruction. The office of the superintendent of public instruction shall work with the department to create a system to facilitate the electronic transmittal of documents required by sections 2 and 3 of this act. Sec. RCW 46.20.031 and 2002 c 279 s 3 are each amended to read as follows: The department shall not issue a driver's license to a person: (1) Who is under the age of sixteen years; (2) Whose driving privilege has been withheld unless and until the department may authorize the driving privilege under RCW 46.20.311; (3) Who has been classified as an alcoholic, drug addict, alcohol abuser, or drug abuser by a program approved by the department of social and health services. The department may, however, issue a license if the person: (a) Has been granted a deferred prosecution under chapter 10.05 RCW; or (b) Is satisfactorily participating in or has successfully completed an alcohol or drug abuse treatment program approved by the department of social and health services and has established control of his or her alcohol or drug abuse problem; (4) Who has previously been adjudged to be mentally ill or insane, or to be incompetent due to a mental disability or disease. The department shall, however, issue a license to the person if he or she otherwise qualifies and: (a) Has been restored to competency by the methods provided by law; or (b) The superior court finds the person able to operate a motor vehicle with safety upon the highways during such incompetency; (5) Who has not passed the driver's licensing examination required by RCW 46.20.120 and 46.20.305, if applicable; (6) Who is required under the laws of this state to deposit proof of financial responsibility and who has not deposited such proof; (7) Who is unable to safely operate a motor vehicle upon the highways due to a physical or mental disability. The department's conclusion that a person is barred from licensing under this subsection must be reasonable and be based upon good and substantial evidence. This determination is subject to review by a court of competent jurisdiction; (8) Who is under eighteen years of age and has not met the requirements of section 2 of this act. Sec. RCW 46.20.055 and 2002 c 352 s 10 and 2002 c 195 s 2 are each reenacted and amended to read as follows: (1) Driver's instruction permit. The department may issue a driver's instruction permit with or without a photograph to an applicant who has successfully passed all parts of the examination other than the driving test, provided the information required by RCW 46.20.091, paid a fee of fifteen dollars, and meets the following requirements: (a) Is at least fifteen and one-half years of age; or (b) Is at least fifteen years of age and: (i) Has submitted a proper application; ((and)) (ii) Is enrolled in a traffic safety education program offered, approved, and accredited by the superintendent of public instruction or offered by a ((driving [driver])) driver training school licensed and inspected by the department of licensing under chapter 46.82 RCW, that includes practice driving; and (c) If under the age of eighteen, has met the requirements of section 2 of this act. (2) Waiver of written examination for instruction permit. The department may waive the written examination, if, at the time of application, an applicant is enrolled in: (a) A traffic safety education course as defined by RCW 28A.220.020(2); or (b) A course of instruction offered by a licensed driver training school as defined by RCW 46.82.280(1). The department may require proof of registration in such a course as it deems necessary. (3) Effect of instruction permit. A person holding a driver's instruction permit may drive a motor vehicle, other than a motorcycle, upon the public highways if: (a) The person has immediate possession of the permit; and (b) An approved instructor, or a licensed driver with at least five years of driving experience, occupies the seat beside the driver. (4) Term of instruction permit. A driver's instruction permit is valid for one year from the date of issue. (a) The department may issue one additional one-year permit. (b) The department may issue a third driver's permit if it finds after an investigation that the permittee is diligently seeking to improve driving proficiency. Sec. RCW 46.20.091 and 2000 c 115 s 4 are each amended to read as follows: (1) Application. In order to apply for a driver's license or instruction permit the applicant must provide his or her: (a) Name of record, as established by documentation required under RCW 46.20.035; (b) Date of birth, as established by satisfactory evidence of age; (c) Sex; (d) Washington residence address; (e) Description; (f) Driving licensing history, including: (i) Whether the applicant has ever been licensed as a driver or chauffeur and, if so, (A) when and by what state or country; (B) whether the license has ever been suspended or revoked; and (C) the date of and reason for the suspension or revocation; or (ii) Whether the applicant's application to another state or country for a driver's license has ever been refused and, if so, the date of and reason for the refusal; ((and)) (g) If under the age of eighteen, the information required under section 2 of this act; and (h) Any additional information required by the department. (2) Sworn statement. An application for an instruction permit or for an original driver's license must be made upon a form provided by the department. The form must include a section for the applicant to indicate whether he or she has received driver training and, if so, where. The identifying documentation verifying the name of record must be accompanied by the applicant's written statement that it is valid. The information provided on the form must be sworn to and signed by the applicant before a person authorized to administer oaths. An applicant who makes a false statement on an application for a driver's license or instruction permit is guilty of false swearing, a gross misdemeanor, under RCW 9A.72.040. (3) Driving records from other jurisdictions. If a person previously licensed in another jurisdiction applies for a Washington driver's license, the department shall request a copy of the applicant's driver's record from the other jurisdiction. The driving record from the other jurisdiction becomes a part of the driver's record in this state. (4) Driving records to other jurisdictions. If another jurisdiction requests a copy of a person's Washington driver's record, the department shall provide a copy of the record. The department shall forward the record without charge if the other jurisdiction extends the same privilege to the state of Washington. Otherwise the department shall charge a reasonable fee for transmittal of the record. Sec. RCW 46.20.100 and 2002 c 195 s 1 are each amended to read as follows: (1) Application. The application of a person under the age of eighteen years for a driver's license or a motorcycle endorsement must be signed by a parent or guardian with custody of the minor. If the person under the age of eighteen has no father, mother, or guardian, then the application must be signed by the minor's employer. (2) Traffic safety education requirement. For a person under the age of eighteen years to obtain a driver's license he or she must meet the traffic safety education requirements of this subsection. (a) To meet the traffic safety education requirement for a driver's license the applicant must satisfactorily complete a traffic safety education course as defined in RCW 28A.220.020 for a course offered by a school district, or as defined by the department of licensing for a course offered by a driver training school licensed under chapter 46.82 RCW. The course offered by a school district or an approved private school must meet the standards established by the office of the state superintendent of public instruction. The course offered by a driver training school must meet the standards established by the department of licensing with the advice of the driver instructors' advisory committee, pursuant to RCW 46.82.300. The traffic safety education course may be provided by: (i) A recognized secondary school; or (ii) A driver training school licensed under chapter 46.82 RCW that is annually approved by the department of licensing. (b) To meet the traffic safety education requirement for a motorcycle endorsement, the applicant must successfully complete a motorcycle safety education course that meets the standards established by the department of licensing. (c) The department may waive the traffic safety education requirement for a driver's license if the applicant demonstrates to the department's satisfaction that: (i) He or she was unable to take or complete a traffic safety education course; (ii) A need exists for the applicant to operate a motor vehicle; and (iii) He or she has the ability to operate a motor vehicle in such a manner as not to jeopardize the safety of persons or property. The department may adopt rules to implement this subsection (2)(c) in concert with the supervisor of the traffic safety education section of the office of the superintendent of public instruction. (d) The department may waive the traffic safety education requirement if the applicant was licensed to drive a motor vehicle or motorcycle outside this state and provides proof that he or she has had education equivalent to that required under this subsection. (3) Basic literacy requirement. For a person under the age of eighteen years to obtain a driver's instruction permit, driver's license, intermediate driver's license, or motorcycle endorsement, the person must meet the requirements of section 2 of this act. --- END --- Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Jean, you can copy ALL on your hotline calls. Keep up the good work!! Excellent letter! --- In wa-ed-deform@yahoogroups.com, "Jean M. Ward" wrote: > Here is an e-mail I sent today (2-6-03) to the SPONSORS of HB 1658 ... The HOTLINE will ONLY let you send messages to your legislators and Senator in your district so you're stuck e-mailing and trying to catch them on the phone between meetings. > > Jean Ward > Bonney Lake, WA > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Jean M. Ward > To: sump_bo@l... ; sullivan_br@l... ; skinner_ma@l... ; simpson_ge@l... ; nixon_to@l... ; lantz_pa@l... ; ericksen_do@l... ; delvin_je@l... ; chase_ma@l... ; campbell_to@l... ; alexande_ga@l... ; miloscia_ma@l... ; holmquis_ja@l... > Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 2:22 PM > Subject: To HB 1658 Sponsors (Linking academic assessment to driver's license) > > > February 6, 2003 > > Dear HB 1658 Sponsors: > > I urge you to withdraw your sponsorship and oppose HB 1658 (linking academic assessment to obtaining a driver's license under age 18) for the following reasons: > > 1. This bill gives unwarranted power to the Academic, Achievement and Accountability Commission (an APPOINTED, not elected body) by granting them the duty of identifying performance levels from a list of assessments for private school students and home based instruction students. > > 2. This bill is in violation of the Home Based Instruction Law (RCW 28A.200.010 ) in that annual test results are private and for parents' exclusive use. This bill would make those test results public which would be transmitted electronically to a governmental body. This is an invasion of our privacy. > > 3. Drivers under age 18 are already required to take and pass a Driver's Education Course as a first step to obtaining their license. Reading is a prerequisite to successful passage. > > 4. Drivers under age 18 must also pass both the state's written and range driver's tests to obtain a license. > > 5. Linking academic assessment to obtaining a driver's license is comparing apples to oranges. If there is a 30% government school drop out rate, this bill isn't the way to fix it (by forcing government school students to stay enrolled to get their driver's license). This bill would hold the other 70% of government school students and ALL private and home based instruction students hostage. > > As an education activist, home based instructor, and concerned parent, I will do everything within my power to spread the word about this invasive bill. > > Some sponsors are already withdrawing their support from this bill. Please reconsider your sponsorship of this bill and oppose HB 1658 in its entirety. > > Jean M. Ward > address omitted > Bonney Lake, WA 98390-8483 > > Homeschool Educator to 5 & 11 yr. old daughters > Government School Student Step-Parent > > Phone numbers omitted Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ -----Original Message----- From: J Burts [mailto:jburts##nwi.net] Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 11:40 AM To: jburts##nwi.net Subject: Fwd: RE: HB 1658 Ok here it is so far Lois McMahon and now Toby Nixon to remove their names from the bill. This bill is a really bad idea and bad bill. This proves that calling and e-mailing does make a difference. We need to hold our reps accountable even our friends. I heard that Gigi may have pulled her name as well but we'll see. If someone can verify let me know. Also Sump pulled his name off. Names to go are: Quall,Anderson,Rockefeller,Holmquist,Tom,Delvin,Shabro,Ericksen,Lantz,Chase,Campbell,Alexander, Simpson.Sullivan,Skinner. We don't want them just taking things out of this bill we just want it dropped. in the section of the bill sec 2 line b where it talks about private and home schools. the tests that will be required are either the wasl or a comparable but it is up to the A+ commission to decide. So you know exactly which test they will decide on. We don't need the A+ commission starting to dictate to the private and home schools. Julanne Burts >X-From_: Nixon_To##leg.wa.gov Fri Feb 7 11:24:28 2003 >From: "Nixon, Rep. Toby" >To: "'J Burts'" >Subject: RE: HB 1658 >Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2003 11:25:54 -0800 >X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Feb 2003 19:25:55.0803 (UTC) >FILETIME=[BC5C6AB0:01C2CEDE] > >My understanding was that you had to pull your name off by 2pm of the day >the bill was introduced. I've checked, and it appears that's not the case -- >someone had given me incorrect information previously. I will remove my name >today. > >__________________________________________________ >Rep. Toby Nixon, 45th District (R-Kirkland) >437 JLOB, P.O. Box 40600, Olympia WA 98504-0600 >(360) 786-7878 Fax: (360) 786-1066 nixon_to##leg.wa.gov > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: J Burts [mailto:jburts##nwi.net] >Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 10:33 AM >To: Nixon, Rep. Toby >Subject: RE: HB 1658 > > >Just a note I heard that Lois has pulled her name off so you may want to ck >on it. >Julanne > > > > > > >At 09:07 AM 2/7/03 -0800, you wrote: > >Julanne, I CAN'T pull my name off the bill. It violates the rules of the > >House. I took Gigi's word for it that it would not have any effect on home > >or private school kids, and it turns out that wasn't the case. We just need > >to kill the bill through the normal process. It won't help now to keep all > >your folks pelting me with emails; have them start pelting the Education > >Committee members. > > > > -- Toby > > > >__________________________________________________ > >Rep. Toby Nixon, 45th District (R-Kirkland) > >437 JLOB, P.O. Box 40600, Olympia WA 98504-0600 > >(360) 786-7878 Fax: (360) 786-1066 nixon_to##leg.wa.gov > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: J Burts [mailto:jburts##nwi.net] > >Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 7:28 PM > >To: Nixon, Rep. Toby > >Subject: HB 1658 > > > > > >Dear Rep Toby NIxon. > > > >On HB 1658 I was going through this bill more and it violates our home and > >private school laws. > >sec. 2 line b talks about home and private schools complying with the wasl. > >By passing this bill you will be making home schools and private schools > >comply with ed reform and the wasl. > > > >I thought you were on our side on this issue the wasl is a bad test, It > >should not be used for graduation requirement or anything else. In 1209 > >this test was supposed to be an assessment only. > >Not a high stakes test. > > > >Also in sec 3 line 3 it is a invasion of privacy with the documents that > >would be transmitted over the net to different places. I also found out > >that some other reps are pulling their names off the bill. > > > >As republicans I thought we were to protect our freedoms and liberties. But > >this bill is the ultimate government control over the citizens via the > >education reform and goals 2000 program which is now called leave no child > >behind act. Just because the reps. at the national level support, > >evidentially socialism does not mean we have to support ed reform at the > >state level. > > > >Other states are starting to drop their assessments cause they are not > >working out. > >We should be doing the same. I can't believe we have to fight our own > >people on these issues. > > > >Please pull your name off this bill and support home and private schools. > > > >Thank you > >Julanne Burts Hi all, Regarding Toby Nixon--he responded to my letter today, and it sounds like he was told this wouldn't affect homeschoolers or private schoolers. Maybe we should check back with him in a day or two. See his response below. Joyce ...........Toby's message, received 2:17 PM, February 6, 2003......... Thanks very much for your message. I was assured by the prime sponsor that the bill would NOT require private or home-schooled kids to take the WASL. It sure reads that way to me. We will make sure that is clarified before the bill goes anywhere. -- Toby __________________________________________________ Rep. Toby Nixon, 45th District (R-Kirkland) 437 JLOB, P.O. Box 40600, Olympia WA 98504-0600 (360) 786-7878 Fax: (360) 786-1066 nixon_to##leg.wa.gov I would be careful as well and not lower our guard you never know what they will do. Julanne At 10:58 AM 2/12/03 -0800, you wrote: >"Probably dead" are the key words here. As Marda pointed out recently, >nothing is dead until the gavel falls on the last session day. There are >deals being made behind the scenes that we are not privvy to. Also, I'll >bet you that Talcott's "staffer" and Talcott herself want to call off the >heat so any comments made by her staff are suspect, IMHO. Representatives >who "trusted" her about this bill were duped by her and removed their >sponsorship. I'm not going to be duped. > >I feel strongly enough about this bill that I am going to keep the pressure >up ... to try to convince those legislators who are on the fence because I >guarantee it will show its ugly face in the future, maybe not this session >but I'll bet it will be next session. > >Amending the next bill to not include private and homeschoolers is only to >pacify the most vocal opposition. Private and homeschoolers should fight >this bill in its entirety because once it's on the books, it's only a matter >of time before homeschoolers are added and brought into the education reform >arena. I don't want to tell you "I told you so". > >Jean Ward >Bonney Lake, WA > >----- Original Message ----- >From: >To: >Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 10:36 AM >Subject: [WHEN] HB 1658 - Drivers license bill > > > > > > Just a quick update ... > > > > I talked with Gigi Talcott's staffer this morning for about 30 minutes >about > > this bill. It was an "interesting" conversation. > > > > The most important thing I learned is that this bill is probably dead. It > > would have to get through the Transportation Cmte (as well as the >Education > > Cmte) and they have informed Gigi that they are not even going to give it >a > > hearing. So it sounds like this bill is going nowhere this session. > > > > She also said that *if* this bill were to go anywhere, Gigi has pretty >much > > decided that she would amend it to *exempt* homeschoolers all together. >It > > sounds like they have gotten the message "loud and clear" from >homeschoolers. > > > > It also sounds like Talcott may try to revamp this bill and introduce > > something similar again in the future. For now though, it looks like this > > one is dead. We can probably lower our level of concern about this bill >and > > just "keep an eye on it" ... in case it starts moving again. > > > > ~Lynette > > > > > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Good Job Jim Julanne At 12:02 PM 2/12/03 -0800, you wrote: I sent this off to my representative when I found out he is a sponsor. ----------------------- Rep. Anderson - I see you are a sponsor of Rep. Talcott's HB 1658 bill to tie getting a driver's license with passing the state WASL. This is terrible bill for many reasons. 1. The WASL has been proven to be invalid, causing an ever increasing backlash and outcry from concerned parents and teachers from all across this state. 2. The bill will FORCE private and homeschoolers (my daughter for example) to get on-baord the WASL train 'or else'. Whether it is the WASL, or any other state required test, most homeschoolers and private school kids shun public schools for one reason - we do NOT want to have anything to do with public education!!! "(b) A person who is enrolled in a private school approved under chapter 28A.195 RCW or an education clinic under chapter 28A.205 RCW, or who is engaged in home-based instruction under chapter 28A.200 RCW, shall demonstrate successful completion of the reading and writing assessments on one of the assessments in (a) of this subsection or on a comparably rigorous assessment from a list of assessments, with required performance levels, identified by the academic achievement and accountability commission." 3. This is one of a continuous stream of attempts to tie public education into every aspect of our lives. Ever hear of School-to-Work/Goals2000 'cradle to grave'? Again please remove your sponsorship from this bill. I am extremely disappointed in Rep. Talcott for being the prime writer of this, and any republicans who support this. It this bill, or any future bill like it, ever passes into law there will be a roar across this state that will be deafening! Please respond back to me with your intent in this. Thank you - Jim Keeffe 13520 434th Ave. SE North Bend Jean M. Ward wrote: "Probably dead" are the key words here. As Marda pointed out recently, nothing is dead until the gavel falls on the last session day. There are deals being made behind the scenes that we are not privvy to. Also, I'll bet you that Talcott's "staffer" and Talcott herself want to call off the heat so any comments made by her staff are suspect, IMHO. Representatives who "trusted" her about this bill were duped by her and removed their sponsorship. I'm not going to be duped. I feel strongly enough about this bill that I am going to keep the pressure up ... to try to convince those legislators who are on the fence because I guarantee it will show its ugly face in the future, maybe not this session but I'll bet it will be next session. Amending the next bill to not include private and homeschoolers is only to pacify the most vocal opposition. Private and homeschoolers should fight this bill in its entirety because once it's on the books, it's only a matter of time before homeschoolers are added and brought into the education reform arena. I don't want to tell you "I told you so". Jean Ward Bonney Lake, WA ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 10:36 AM Subject: [WHEN] HB 1658 - Drivers license bill Just a quick update ... I talked with Gigi Talcott's staffer this morning for about 30 minutes about this bill. It was an "interesting" conversation. The most important thing I learned is that this bill is probably dead. It would have to get through the Transportation Cmte (as well as the Education Cmte) and they have informed Gigi that they are not even going to give it a hearing. So it sounds like this bill is going nowhere this session. She also said that *if* this bill were to go anywhere, Gigi has pretty much decided that she would amend it to *exempt* homeschoolers all together. It sounds like they have gotten the message "loud and clear" from homeschoolers. It also sounds like Talcott may try to revamp this bill and introduce something similar again in the future. For now though, it looks like this one is dead. We can probably lower our level of concern about this bill and just "keep an eye on it" ... in case it starts moving again. ~Lynette Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Good Job Jim Julanne At 12:02 PM 2/12/03 -0800, you wrote: I sent this off to my representative when I found out he is a sponsor. ----------------------- Rep. Anderson - I see you are a sponsor of Rep. Talcott's HB 1658 bill to tie getting a driver's license with passing the state WASL. This is terrible bill for many reasons. 1. The WASL has been proven to be invalid, causing an ever increasing backlash and outcry from concerned parents and teachers from all across this state. 2. The bill will FORCE private and homeschoolers (my daughter for example) to get on-baord the WASL train 'or else'. Whether it is the WASL, or any other state required test, most homeschoolers and private school kids shun public schools for one reason - we do NOT want to have anything to do with public education!!! "(b) A person who is enrolled in a private school approved under chapter 28A.195 RCW or an education clinic under chapter 28A.205 RCW, or who is engaged in home-based instruction under chapter 28A.200 RCW, shall demonstrate successful completion of the reading and writing assessments on one of the assessments in (a) of this subsection or on a comparably rigorous assessment from a list of assessments, with required performance levels, identified by the academic achievement and accountability commission." 3. This is one of a continuous stream of attempts to tie public education into every aspect of our lives. Ever hear of School-to-Work/Goals2000 'cradle to grave'? Again please remove your sponsorship from this bill. I am extremely disappointed in Rep. Talcott for being the prime writer of this, and any republicans who support this. It this bill, or any future bill like it, ever passes into law there will be a roar across this state that will be deafening! Please respond back to me with your intent in this. Thank you - Jim Keeffe 13520 434th Ave. SE North Bend Jean M. Ward wrote: "Probably dead" are the key words here. As Marda pointed out recently, nothing is dead until the gavel falls on the last session day. There are deals being made behind the scenes that we are not privvy to. Also, I'll bet you that Talcott's "staffer" and Talcott herself want to call off the heat so any comments made by her staff are suspect, IMHO. Representatives who "trusted" her about this bill were duped by her and removed their sponsorship. I'm not going to be duped. I feel strongly enough about this bill that I am going to keep the pressure up ... to try to convince those legislators who are on the fence because I guarantee it will show its ugly face in the future, maybe not this session but I'll bet it will be next session. Amending the next bill to not include private and homeschoolers is only to pacify the most vocal opposition. Private and homeschoolers should fight this bill in its entirety because once it's on the books, it's only a matter of time before homeschoolers are added and brought into the education reform arena. I don't want to tell you "I told you so". Jean Ward Bonney Lake, WA ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 10:36 AM Subject: [WHEN] HB 1658 - Drivers license bill Just a quick update ... I talked with Gigi Talcott's staffer this morning for about 30 minutes about this bill. It was an "interesting" conversation. The most important thing I learned is that this bill is probably dead. It would have to get through the Transportation Cmte (as well as the Education Cmte) and they have informed Gigi that they are not even going to give it a hearing. So it sounds like this bill is going nowhere this session. She also said that *if* this bill were to go anywhere, Gigi has pretty much decided that she would amend it to *exempt* homeschoolers all together. It sounds like they have gotten the message "loud and clear" from homeschoolers. It also sounds like Talcott may try to revamp this bill and introduce something similar again in the future. For now though, it looks like this one is dead. We can probably lower our level of concern about this bill and just "keep an eye on it" ... in case it starts moving again. ~Lynette Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Thank you for the reply. The next step is to de-link the Certificate of Mastery from the high school diploma. Requiring students to be ready for a 4 year university makes absolutely no sense for a high school diploma requirement. The WASL was intentionally set at a level well beyond the capabilities of average students, with the intention of setting a "goal" to see if students could meet the higher standards. It is however insane to penalize students by taking away the diploma on the basis of such experimental standards which have been shown to be completely invalid for all but the most talented college bound students. -----Original Message----- From: McCarty, Deryl [mailto:McCarty_De##leg.wa.gov] Sent: Monday, February 17, 2003 4:51 PM To: 'arthurhu##attbi.com' Subject: FW: HB 1658 "The TB Carrot / Stick bill" Dear Arthur, After several long discussions with Rep Gigi Talcott, she has decided to withdraw HB 1658 from consideration. Your input was critical to that determination because you and others helped reveal its unintended effects. For that I sincerely thank you. More importantly, the discussion on this bill underscores that we have not kept the lines of communication as robust as we should. Expect to see several group meetings and discussions, perhaps even the creation of a more permanent but informal advisory group, to meet with me, Rep Talcott and others to keep up with educational issues on a broad scale It may be that group who can help us create legislation that provides Washington parents the broadest possible range of educational choices for their children. (Or defeat legislation that restricts it.) Once again, thank you for your input. Jan Shabro, 31st District -----Original Message----- From: arthur hu [mailto:arthurhu##attbi.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 8:42 PM To: Geoncyn##aol.com; McCarson, Cheryl Cc: Roach, Rep. Dan; Shabro, Rep. Jan; McCarty, Deryl; Bush, Rep. Roger; Holmquist, Rep. Janea; Tom, Rep. Rodney; Santos, Rep. Sharon; Rockefeller, Rep. Phil; Hunter, Rep. Ross; Haigh, Rep. Kathy; Cox, Rep. Don; Anderson, Rep. Glenn; McDermott, Rep. Joe; Quall, Rep. Dave; Talcott, Rep. Gigi; Ericksen, Rep. Doug; Delvin, Rep. Jerome; Sump, Rep. Bob; Skinner, Rep. Mary; Alexander, Rep. Gary; Campbell, Rep. Tom; Kristiansen, Rep. Dan; Roach, Sen. Pam; smith-mi##gov.wa.com Subject: RE: HB 1658 "The TB Carrot / Stick bill" Ditto from Arthur Hu, 2000 Candidate for Superintendent of Public Instruction. Driver's licences should be tied ONLY be tied to things which have something to do with driving requirements. The WASL is set to "high academic performance" beyond the ability of 70% of students, which is fine for college bound students, but simply insane as a way of measuring whether students have completed reasonable requirements crossing the broad spectrum of student ability from special education (the mentally retarded or merely below average) to the Harvard bound. The fact that the purpose of this bill is merely to boost the WASL and has nothing to do with enhancing driver safety, and means that the dept of licensing will have to cross reference a OSPI database of WASL test scores is simply crazy. If any of you folks had any guts or spine, you'd sponsor legislation to BAN the use of WASL for high stakes decisions, and roll back the current threat to make the WASL a diploma requirement in 2008. It is insane to commit to a test which flunks out 70% of the population, nearly all minorities when we are graduating over 80% of students today. This whole thing came out of Terry Bergeson's sick mind. No carrot or stick is going to give everybody high test scores. This is the whole madness of "education reform" that enough carrots and sticks will turn everybody into little Einsteins and perform at "world class levels". No nation or state on earth has 100% of students performing at university entrance levels, and Washington will NOT be the first. Arthur Hu 12422 107th pl NE Kirkland WA 98034 45th dist. -----Original Message----- From: Geoncyn##aol.com [mailto:Geoncyn##aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 2:47 PM To: McCarson_Ch##leg.wa.gov Cc: roach_da##leg.wa.gov; shabro_ja##leg.wa.gov; McCarty_De##leg.wa.gov; bush_ro##leg.wa.gov; holmquis_ja##leg.wa.gov; tom_ro##leg.wa.gov; santos_sh##leg.wa.gov; rockefel_ph##leg.wa.gov; hunter_ro##leg.wa.gov; haigh_ka##leg.wa.gov; cox_do##leg.wa.gov; anderson_gl##leg.wa.gov; mcdermot_jo##leg.wa.gov; quall_da##leg.wa.gov; talcott_gi##leg.wa.gov; ericksen_do##leg.wa.gov; delvin_je##leg.wa.gov; sump_bo##leg.wa.gov; skinner_ma##leg.wa.gov; alexande_ga##leg.wa.gov; campbell_to##leg.wa.gov; kristian_da##leg.wa.gov; roach_pa##leg.wa.gov; smith-mi##gov.wa.com Subject: Re: HB 1658 "The TB Carrot / Stick bill" "Probably dead" are the key words here. As Marda pointed out recently, nothing is dead until the gavel falls on the last session day. There are deals being made behind the scenes that we are not privvy to. Also, I'll bet you that Talcott's "staffer" and Talcott herself want to call off the heat so any comments made by her staff are suspect, IMHO. Representatives who "trusted" her about this bill were duped by her and removed their sponsorship. I'm not going to be duped. I feel strongly enough about this bill that I am going to keep the pressure up ... to try to convince those legislators who are on the fence because I guarantee it will show its ugly face in the future, maybe not this session but I'll bet it will be next session. Amending the next bill to not include private and homeschoolers is only to pacify the most vocal opposition. Private and homeschoolers should fight this bill in its entirety because once it's on the books, it's only a matter of time before homeschoolers are added and brought into the education reform arena. I don't want to tell you "I told you so". Jean Ward Bonney Lake, WA ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 10:36 AM Subject: [WHEN] HB 1658 - Drivers license bill > > Just a quick update ... > > I talked with Gigi Talcott's staffer this morning for about 30 minutes about > this bill. It was an "interesting" conversation. > > The most important thing I learned is that this bill is probably dead. It > would have to get through the Transportation Cmte (as well as the Education > Cmte) and they have informed Gigi that they are not even going to give it a > hearing. So it sounds like this bill is going nowhere this session. > > She also said that *if* this bill were to go anywhere, Gigi has pretty much > decided that she would amend it to *exempt* homeschoolers all together. It > sounds like they have gotten the message "loud and clear" from homeschoolers. > > It also sounds like Talcott may try to revamp this bill and introduce > something similar again in the future. For now though, it looks like this > one is dead. We can probably lower our level of concern about this bill and > just "keep an eye on it" ... in case it starts moving again. > > ~Lynette Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ that is nice and all but he did not say he would withdraw his support from that bill. I hope he did and will not vote for it again if it comes up. Julanne At 05:47 PM 2/20/03 -0800, you wrote: Gosh, this is one of the nicest return e-mails I received back (rec'd. 2-20-03) on this House Bill. He sent it asking for acknowledgement of my receipt of it too. Please note what sounds like a genuine compliment he made in the last sentence regarding us homeschoolers who called and wrote our representatives and Bill Sponsors about this bill. Jean ----- Original Message ----- From: Bush, Rep. Roger To: 'Jean M. Ward' Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 10:37 AM Subject: RE: HB 1658 - Linking academic assessment to driver's license Dear Jean, Thank you for your email. I apologize for the delay in responding. Being a strong supporter of homeschoolers, I was indeed troubled by the concerns expressed to me by home-school parents about this legislation. I took those concerns to the bill's sponsor, as did, apparently, many of my colleagues. As you may know, because of the ongoing controversies and the fact that so many important questions raised did not have sufficiently clear and satisfactory answers, the decision was made by Rep. Talcott, the prime sponsor, to table the bill. It will proceed no further in the legislative process. Again, thank you for taking the time to express your concerns about this legislation. This is an excellent example of how citizen involvement can affect outcomes in the lawmaking process. I commend you and your fellow home-schoolers for your diligence and tenacity on this important issue. Sincerely, Representative Roger Bush, 2nd Legislative District -----Original Message----- From: Jean M. Ward [mailto:jeanmward##earthlink.net] Sent: Monday, February 10, 2003 6:26 PM To: Bush, Rep. Roger Cc: Talcott, Rep. Gigi; Shabro, Rep. Jan Subject: HB 1658 - Linking academic assessment to driver's license February 10, 2003 Dear Representative Bush: I urge you to remove your sponsorship of this bad bill and vote against it in its entirety. Reps. Lois McMahan and Toby Nixon have both removed their sponsorships after understanding what this bill is all about. Simply put, this bill represents OSPI's attempt to blackmail students to take the WASL and legitimize this flawed and subjective assessment that is under fire. The signs are evident including her arranging the buy-in from the community and 4 year colleges to consider the WASL as an admission prerequisite. Terry Bergeson is panicking big time. This bill is touted by its sponsor as being a "tool" for parents. Parents who are involved don't need this kind of tool because reading by 7th grade isn't an issue and those who aren't won't be helped!! This bill won't be an incentive for them because they won't look that far ahead even if a driver's license under age 18 is on the line. To blackmail the majority of students, including private and home schooled students who are grade levels ahead of public schoolers, for the miniscule minority is ludicrous. Thus, you can intelligently surmise that the real reason for this bill will be to help OSPI require the compliance of test takers thus giving the WASL credibility. That's called blackmail not an "incentive". Please re-look at this bill and join your two fellow Representatives in removing your sponsorship and voting against it in its entirety. Thank you. Jean M. Ward 8101 - 196th Avenue East Bonney Lake, WA 98390-8483 Member of Puyallup Valley Republican Women's Club Board Member of Citizens United for Responsible Education www.curewashington.org Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.