MONTGOMERY — On Wednesday, the House Education Committee voted down legislation allowing students to receive off-site religious instruction as part of their regular education.
The bill received several amendments and a public hearing in previous weeks. While some lawmakers expressed minor concern with the bill's provisions, the final vote was a question mark going into Wednesday's committee meeting. After roughly 20 minutes of discussion, the committee overwhelmingly voted against it.
House Bill 342 (HB342) by State Rep. Susan DuBose (R-Hoover) sought to require each local board of education to adopt a policy allowing elective credit to students released from the classroom to attend religious instruction during the school day.
In 2019, Alabama passed a law authorizing local school boards to allow release time for students participating in religious instruction. With parental consent, students can leave school during the day to attend off-site religious instruction provided by a private organization.
The 2019 law puts the onus of allowing religious release on local education boards, leaving some parents facing roadblocks when their local board does not have a policy allowing a student to receive the instruction. DuBose said only 12 school systems have enacted policies.
HB342 would change the current law from "may" to "shall," mandating local boards to adopt policies.
DuBose has resisted alleged misinformation about the bill for weeks, stating that it was fundamentally about religious liberty.
"Since we passed the legislation that allowed the districts to 'may' implement a policy, we've actually only had 12 districts in our whole state implement as policy," DuBose said. "12 out of the over 130 school districts that we have. We know there is a demand from parents for this program. We've had over 4,000 parent signatures that want this program in districts that do not have this program."
DuBose previously added several amendments to the bill to assuage some concerns. One amendment changed "shall" into "may" in a portion dealing with elective credits. The other amendment clarifies that local school boards can tailor the policy to fit their district's needs.
Despite the amendments, State Rep. Alan Baker (R-Brewton) continued to object to the bill, stating that he believed districts that don't currently permit religious release likely do so to maximize instructional time with the students. He also generally objected to compelling school boards to adopt policies when they have decided not to.
"I recognize there could be some school systems that have not adopted a policy for whatever reason," Baker said. "But then again, I recognize there are probably some school systems that have already been approached about this, and they have made a conscious decision not to adopt a policy. So under that, it seems to go contrary to what you're suggesting, that there's local control because this bill would mandate, require them, even if they've made a conscious, calculated decision by the local authorities that they don't want to adopt a policy."
He continued, "I do have concerns that, although it seems to be inferred or maybe implied that there is local control, to me, it doesn't actually seem like that's the case."
Freshman State Rep. Jeana Ross (R-Arab) questioned whether the 2019 law has had enough time to work since it passed right before the COVID-19 pandemic. She also asked about the practicality of allowing multiple students to leave school facilities for extended periods.
"I have an issue with the practical, the technical implementation of this," Ross said. "Besides, I feel like, in my district, I've been made aware from the people that would be implementing this, it's just another regulation for them. They're doing the best they can. They're already providing for students the best they can for this particular issue."
After the discussion, the committee held a roll call vote, overwhelmingly voting against the bill 9-4 with two abstentions.
Those who voted for the bill include DuBose and State Reps. Bob Fincher (R-Woodland), Mark Gidley (R-Hokes Bluff), Kenneth Paschal (R-Pelham)
Baker, Ross, and State Reps Terri Collins (R-Decatur), Anthony Daniels (D-Huntsville), Tracy Estes (R-Winfield), Jeremy Gray (D-Opelika), TaShina Morris (D-Montgomery), Marcus Paramore (R-Troy), and Ivan Smith (R-Prattville) voted against.
Following the vote, DuBose told 1819 News she had high hopes for the Senate version of the bill, which is sponsored by State Sen. Shay Shelnut (R-Trussville).
"This is part of the process," DuBose said. "I think the committee voted how they felt was the best way to go, and you know, this is why we bring things to the committee, to have it vetted out. I don't think the bill is dead. I mean, it may move easily through the Senate and come back to the House floor and get a vote."
"I think it's amended in the way it needs to be amended, and maybe some people just had a little bit of a problem understanding, and that's just part of the educational process. I expect it to move through the Senate."
To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email [email protected].
Don't miss out! Subscribe to our newsletter and get our top stories every weekday morning.
