Hall Pass: Your Ticket to Understanding School Board Politics, Edition #181

By

Ballotpedia staff

Welcome to Hall Pass, a newsletter written to keep you plugged into the conversations driving  school board governance, the politics surrounding it, and education policy. 

In today’s edition, you’ll find:

  • On the issues: The debate over the Invest In MI Kids amendment 
  • In your district: Teacher strikes
  • Twenty-one states have restricted student cellphone use in K-12 public schools this year
  • Extracurricular: education news from around the web
  • Candidate Connection survey

Reply to this email to share reactions or story ideas!

On the issues: The debate over the Invest In MI Kids amendment

In this section, we curate reporting, analysis, and commentary on the issues school board members deliberate when they set out to offer the best education possible in their district. Missed an issue? Click here to see the previous education debates we’ve covered.

On Oct. 14, the Michigan State Board of Education voted 5-2 to endorse a proposed 2026 constitutional amendment that would tax high-income earners to raise revenue for K-12 public schools. The funds would be designated “to support classrooms in local school districts,” such as reducing class sizes, providing career and technical education, and recruiting and retaining teachers. The initiative, which supporters have titled “Invest In MI Kids,” would levy a 5% surcharge on annual taxable income of more than $1 million for joint returns and $500,000 for single returns. 

The board’s eight members are elected to eight-year terms. Democrats hold a 6-2 majority. 

Supporters filed the initiative with the Michigan Board of State Canvassers in June and are currently working to gather the required 446,198 valid signatures to put it on the 2026 ballot. The Detroit Federation of Teachers, the Michigan Parent Teacher Association, and U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D) have endorsed the proposed amendment. The Michigan Chamber of Commerce, the Small Business Association of Michigan, and the Detroit Regional Chamber opposed it.

Justine Galbraith, a former teacher who now works for Fund MI Future, an organization that advocates for funding for public services, says the Invest in MI Kids amendment would provide a reliable funding source for schools, regardless of which party controls the Michigan state government, Congress, or the White House. Galbraith argues education funding has not kept pace with inflation, leaving schools underfunded and programs like Michigan School Meals in jeopardy. She says the Invest in MI Kids amendment is a long-term solution to the long-term problem of school funding. 

Jarrett Skorup, vice president for marketing and communications with the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, an organization that advocates for free markets and limited government, says the Invest in MI Kids amendment would drive taxpayers out of Michigan and toward states with lower tax burdens. He argues Michigan spends more on public schools than in the past, and that similarly narrow tax policies in other states have led over time to higher taxes on middle-class families. Skorup says a constitutional amendment is unnecessary, as there’s nothing currently stopping lawmakers from appropriating more money for schools. 

If legislators won’t fund our schools, it’s up to us ‘Invest In MI Kids’ | Justine Galbraith, Bridge Michigan

“The Invest in MI Kids proposal is the first step in reversing the decades-long trend of starving our schools and creating a stable revenue base for all Michigan school districts. This funding is the floor, however, not the ceiling. Voters will still need to be vigilant to elect pro-education legislators and then hold them accountable for their stewardship of this revenue and their passing of adequate, timely budgets. 

“With all of this chaos at the state and federal levels, it’s clear that we need to put permanent solutions in place. Public school districts, the families they serve, the staff they employ, and the children they teach all deserve adequate, reliable funding. We can’t wait any longer–now is the time to demand more for our communities.”

‘Millionaire’s tax’ ballot proposal would hurt all Michiganders | Jarrett Skorup, Mackinac Center for Public Policy

“The extra money raised by the increase would ostensibly be used to fund education, but Michigan is spending billions more on schools and has increased spending tremendously over the last decade. Schools now receive $23,700 per student, or half a million dollars per classroom. This ballot proposal is not about helping schools — lawmakers can always appropriate more money for schools. It is instead about changing the Michigan Constitution to make it easy to raise taxes. 

“When flat tax systems turn into progressive tax systems, they always start by targeting ‘the rich.’ The first federal income tax started out targeting just a tiny number of households. It grew into a monstrosity with higher and higher rates affecting almost everyone. We see the same pattern in the states. Connecticut eliminated its flat tax in 1996, promising a tax on the rich in exchange for cutting taxes for everyone else. Despite this promise, property and income taxes on the middle class quickly rose. In Illinois, it didn’t take long for lawmakers to begin proposing a bunch of different graduated income tax rates to put in place if voters changed that state’s constitutional flat tax.”

In your district: Teacher strikes

We’re still accepting responses to our survey on teacher strikes. Please complete the very brief survey below—anonymously, if you prefer—and we may share your response with fellow subscribers in an upcoming newsletter.

Teachers unions have used the strike as a tool for bargaining for higher compensation, better working conditions, and other factors related to the teaching profession since the early 20th century. According to researchers at the Brookings Institution, nearly 800 teacher strikes occurred between 2007 and 2023. 

We recently featured two contrasting perspectives on the ethics of teacher strikes, and now we want to know what you think. 

Should teacher strikes be allowed, restricted, or prohibited—and why?

Click here to respond!

Twenty-one states have restricted student cellphone use in K-12 public schools this year

Governors in 27 states have signed laws or issued orders restricting student cellphone access in K-12 public schools since Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) signed HB 379 in 2023, with 21 doing so in 2025 alone.

On Oct. 31, Wisconsin became the latest state to enact a statewide policy, when Gov. Tony Evers (D) approved AB 2. The law gives districts until July 1, 2026, to implement a policy prohibiting students from using cell phones and other electronic communication devices during instructional time and requires that schools provide exceptions for emergencies, individual education plans (IEPs), and health-related purposes.

While most states with bans are Republican-led, concerns about how phones and social media affect student performance and mental health have drawn bipartisan support. The number of statewide laws and policies restricting student cellphone usage increased dramatically in 2025 compared to previous years. 

Wisconsin bill divided Democrats

AB 2 passed the Republican-controlled Wisconsin Assembly 53-45 on Feb. 19. One Republican joined all Democrats in opposing it. State Rep. Joel Kitchens (R), one of the bill’s sponsors, said the point of the bill was to create a consistent approach to phones in schools. But Democrats criticized the bill’s top-down approach, with state Rep. Ryan Clancy (D) saying, “If we were serious about addressing cell phones in schools, we would do so by listening to parents, teachers, schools and districts and the students themselves, and providing support and funding rather than a mandate.”

On Oct. 14, the Wisconsin Senate, where Republicans hold an 18-15 majority, passed the bill 29-4. 

Evers said that although he believes decisions about cellphone policies should be made at the local level, he signed the bill because “we know that cellphones can be a major distraction from learning, a source of bullying, and a barrier to our kids’ important work of just being a kid.”

States enacted school cellphone restrictions at seven times the rate in 2025 as they did from 2023 to 2024

Between May 2023 and the end of 2024, six states enacted statewide restrictions on phones in schools—roughly one every three months on average. But since the beginning of 2025, an average of roughly two states have enacted restrictions each month. 

Arkansas was the first in 2025, when Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders (R) signed SB 142 on Feb. 21. Before Wisconsin, the most recent state to limit cellphones in public schools was Oregon, where Gov. Tina Kotek (D) issued an executive order on July 2 prohibiting student cellphone use during the school day.

Thirty-six states have enacted laws or adopted policies that address cellphone usage in schools since 2023, but not all of them require that districts limit the technology. Connecticut, Kansas, Washington, and Idaho, for example, adopted policies that encourage districts to restrict cellphones during class time. Alaska, Colorado, Maine, Minnesota, and New Mexico, however, require that districts adopt some kind of policy but don’t specify the form those policies should take.

The majority of states with bans are Republican-led

Of the 27 states that have required districts to restrict student cellphone access in schools:

  • Seventeen have Republican trifectas. 
  • Three have Democratic trifectas. 
  • Six have divided governments. 

In the six states with divided governments, four have Democratic governors—Arizona, Kentucky, North Carolina, and Wisconsin—and two—Nevada and Vermont—have Republican governors. 

California and New York, two of the three Democratic trifectas with cell phone restrictions,  together account for 8.5 million (17%) of the country’s 50 million K-12 public school students, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. California enacted its law in September 2024. New York adopted its ban in May, when the government enacted the Fiscal Year 2026 budget. 

Lawmakers in Pennsylvania and Massachusetts weigh bans

With two more months remaining in the year, it’s possible the number of states enacting cellphone bans in schools in 2025 could still grow. Of the seven states whose legislatures are still in session, at least two are weighing bills that would restrict student cellphone use in K-12 public schools: 

  • Massachusetts: On July 31, the Massachusetts Senate passed SB 2581 38-2. The bill would require districts to enact policies banning student cellphone use during the school day, with exceptions for, among other things, students with disabilities and medical conditions. The bill is now pending before the House Ways and Means Committee. Massachusetts has a Democratic trifecta. 
  • Pennsylvania: State Sens. Devlin Robinson (R), Vince Hughes (D), and Steve Santarsiero (D) introduced SB 1014 on Oct. 10. The bill would require districts to prohibit students from accessing their cellphones during the school day, with exceptions similar to those in the Massachusetts bill. The Senate Education Committee held a hearing on the bill on Oct. 23. Santarsiero said, “We are trying to strike that balance, not to be overly prescriptive in terms of what the school districts do, how they implement the policy — because we understand the importance of local control — but to make a firm position [on] what the state’s policy is.” Pennsylvania has a divided government.

Click here to learn more about state-level policies on cellphones in schools. 

Extracurricular: education news from around the web

This section contains links to recent education-related articles from around the internet. If you know of a story we should be reading, reply to this email to share it with us! 

Take our Candidate Connection survey to reach voters in your district

Today, we’re looking at surveys from the two candidates who ran in the Nov. 4 general election to represent the Dulles District on the Loudoun County Public Schools school board, in Virginia. Loudon County Public Schools is the third-largest district in Virginia, with roughly 81,600 students. It is located in the northern part of the state, near D.C. and Maryland. 

Five seats were up for election this year. 

Jonathon Pepper defeated Santos Munoz 56-44%. Pepper’s career experience includes working as a teacher, dean, coach, assistant principal, and professional development trainer. The Loudoun County (VA) Democratic Committee endorsed Pepper. 

Here’s how Pepper answered the question, “What are the main points you want voters to remember about your goals for your time in office?”

  • “Jon is the only LCPS parent in this race -- he is uniquely invested in ensuring a high-quality education for all LCPS students in a safe, caring, and supportive school environment.
  • With a background in curriculum and instruction and education leadership, Jon possesses the institutional knowledge of what it takes to lead maintain a successful school system focused on rigorous academics and diversity of opportunity for all students.
  • As a proud public educator, Jon understands the challenges faced by educators around the country today and will do what it takes to mitigate as many of these challenges as possible in order to recruit and maintain outstanding educators.”

Click here to read the rest of Pepper’s responses. 

Here’s how Munoz answered the question, “What are the main points you want voters to remember about your goals for your time in office?”

  • “The soul of our nation is at stake, and the battle begins where our future is shaped: in our schools, with the education of our children. Loudoun County, VA stands at the forefront of this critical fight, a beacon of hope and resolve in defending the values that make our country strong—truth, liberty, and the pursuit of knowledge untainted by division or dogma.
  • Our children deserve an education that uplifts their minds, strengthens their character, and equips them to think critically, not conform blindly. Yet, in classrooms across our nation, and acutely here in Loudoun County, we face a growing challenge: curricula and policies that prioritize ideology over inquiry, division over unity, and control over freedom. This is not just a local issue—it is a national crisis, one that threatens the very foundation of our republic.
  • We are called to act, not with anger, but with unwavering commitment. The cause we champion is not merely about one county or one school board; it is about ensuring that every child, in every corner of this land, inherits an education that honors their potential and our shared heritage. It is about safeguarding the principles that have guided us through trials and triumphs—principles now at risk of being eroded in the place where they should be most fiercely protected: our schools.”

Click here to read the rest of Munoz’s responses. 

In the 2024 election cycle, 6,539 candidates completed the survey, including over 500 school board candidates. 
The survey contains over 30 questions, and you can choose the ones you feel will best represent your views to voters. If you complete the survey, a box with your answers will display on your Ballotpedia profile. Your responses will also appear in our sample ballot.