Montana legislators will have an opportunity next year to send a clear message to our young people: We know that your education is a vital to your future success.
A local legislator is drafting a bill that is designed to at least partially address the dropout problem in Montana schools. Rep. Mike Miller (R) has submitted a request for a bill that will tie the privilege of driving with school attendance. As I understand the proposal, a person under the age of 19 will not be allowed to possess a driver’s license unless he/she is enrolled in and attending school full-time – or has already graduated.
While it will not single-handedly correct the drop-out problem; it does something that no other proposal I’ve seen does – it communicates a societal recognition that a high school education is a minimum requirement for a productive life. It’s no big secret that high school drop-outs are far more likely to end up on the wrong side of the law (according to Miller, about 85% of the men and 75% of the women in Montana’s prisons never completed high school), and they continue to be an economic drain on society throughout their lives due to low incomes and poor financial choices (see the debate over the recent I-164 ballot initiative). I could go on about the obstacles faced by drop-outs, but we all know that this is a serious, life-long, generational problem. The opportunities for those without even a high school education will continue to get worse as technology becomes more and more sophisticated and markets become more globally competitive.
There are all sorts of thoughts, ideas, proposals, and even some other proposed legislation out there for consideration, but this bill is unique in a couple of ways: First, it combines something that kids want with something they need, and second, it should be relatively easy and inexpensive to implement. Not only does this incentivize young people to get that high school diploma – how uncool is it to be sixteen and not have wheels? – but it sends a message about where our priorities are: school before cool.
Worth thinking about. What about home schooling?
Then again, if you aren’t going to school, you don’t “need” wheels so badly, right? Maybe that takes care of the home school question.
I seriously doubt that there’s a real problem with home school drop-outs.
Where would home school dropouts go to? And when do you think their teacher would notice?
The only concern that I have is they not criminalize it. Right now, driving while suspended is a mandatory 2 day suspension that cannot be suspended. Filling the local jails with dropouts may just be getting them familiar with their anticipated surroundings, but it is not that cost efficient.
Good point, Steve. I don’t think the intent is criminalization.
It seems to me, in a state like Montana, just publishing the names of those who have dropped out and who don’t have a legitimate license could be sufficient to get a significant percentage of them back in the classroom. Not all, of course, but I suspect that the problem is worse because so many of these kids are “invisible” to society (and to the school administration!)
The concept sounds great to me, but the implementation is going to be more challenging than I thought. I’m meeting with the bills drafter on Monday afternoon to discuss some options.
I’m pretty sure I’ll have to change the age from 19 back to 18 as you are an adult (for everything except alcohol) at age 18.
Some of the issues:
I don’t want to get OPI involved or the schools with having to verify enrollment. I’m thinking have the parent just certify that their child is actually attending school or being home schooled. I’d also accept enrollment in an apprenticeship program.
If a teen gets their license at age 15, then drops out at age 16, how do we catch that as the license is good til age 21. I want to revoke any existing license if the student drops out before age 18. I need to find an easy method to verify attendance.
I’m trying very hard not to create another bureaucracy and to keep the costs minimal. If it proves that I cannot do that, I will not submit the bill.
I am also going to try to not allow the parent(s) to take a State Income Tax deduction for the dependent if the child is not in school or already graduated.
Other ideas that I know will not fly, but would be interesting are that child does not count as a family member if the parents are drawing TANF or SNAP. Refusing enrollment in CHIP/Healthy Montana Kids would also be interesting.
The idea is to “incentivize” the kids and the parents to get a high school education.
One potential risk is keep kids in school that refuse to learn and just disrupt the learning environment for everyone else. At present, I do not know how to handle that.
According to a recent study by the Foundation for Educational Choice and Montana Family Foundation, annually our dropouts cost Montana $23 million in Medicaid payments and $216 million in lost taxable earnings among other costs. They project that if we can cut our dropout rate in half, it will yield more than $32 million in direct gross economic benefits to our state.
I don’t think the intent is criminalization either, however; if a student is driving after their license has been suspended in compliance with the proposed law, should the penalties be different than for adults? I’d almost think that the penalties would need to be stiff as teens often feel above the law anyway.
I like the idea of tying the privilege of driving to education, dropouts are definitely an economic drain. Considering the lack of public transportation in Montana combined with the long winters and great distance between cities, I would expect this sort of law to be a deterrent to leaving school.
I wonder about the costs of implementing the program- how will it be funded? Can it be done without creating more government jobs? How will it be enforced? My recent DMV experiences were no example of government efficiency. There are several states doing this already, it would be interesting to see if and how they’ve been successful.
The home-school students would have to be addressed although I really doubt there is much of a problem with them dropping out.
not for it. kids are leaving school early, getting the ged and moving on. problem is, we aren’t giving them options when they want to escape the jaded, who gives a rip prison guards of high school.
don’t increase nanny state govt. give kids choices!
Thanks for the great points and good discussion everyone.
Rep Miller’s points about implementing this are key – the devil’s always in the details, but I think there are ways to achieve the goal without any significant expense or increased bureaucracy.
One of the major keys is to approach this from the standpoint that it is the parent/guardian/student’s responsibility to PROVE that the student IS attending school – not the other way around. That will make a huge difference in implementing this. It is not the school’s responsibility to see that your kid is enrolled and attending school, folks!!!
How difficult would it be for the schools to publish a list of all enrolled students every semester? If the kid’s name isn’t on a list – no DL can be issued, or if a DL was already issued, it is considered automatically suspended. Perhaps the law could require the parent/legal guardian to turn the actual driver’s license in to the DMV or pay a significant fine if the child is not in school.
Again, it’s about focusing on incentivizing the kid and the parents/legal guardians to be in school – carrot or stick – whatever gets the job done.
Same thing goes for home-schoolers – parents have to provide proof that the child is being home-schooled. That’s not a problem for legitimate home schoolers.