The term “exclusive” was removed from the NH Constitution, Pt. 1, Art. 6 in 1968 under the guise of “removing obsolete sectarian language” and without any debate, disclosure or public  discussion on this issue.

New Hampshire Register, State Year-book and Legislative Manual (1873), pg. 74
"Previous to 1805 the District System was unknown.  That year an act was passed empowering towns to divide into school districts.  The statute of 1827 ordered the sub-division of towns into school districts. The act of 1843 required that sub-division under severe penalty."

This uniquely American system of decentralized education was a vigorous and long-lived reaction against the unreasoning European monarchy, which had prevailed in previous times and was imposed upon our forefathers.  Decentralization was considered a privilege of vital importance and not lightly to be relinquished.  

The District System was common to many states, not just New Hampshire.  By 1872 there were 234 towns in New Hampshire with 2,284 School Districts and 2,452 schools.  Each school district had an average of 30 students.  Starting in the 1870’s thousands of these school districts were consolidated.  

Only 164 districts remain today.  There are over 12,000 students in Nashua and over 15,000 students in Manchester -- each in a single district!

The compiled statutes of the state of New Hampshire (1853)
Ch 73: Of the Creation and Division of School Districts, pg. 167

Sec 12. The selectmen of two or more adjoining towns, on petition of any member of any school district in either of said towns, may, by a majority of the selectmen in each town, disannex such member, together with his taxable property, for school purposes, from the district to which he belongs, and annex him to one of the adjoining towns.

Sec. 13. Such selectmen may, in like manner, on petition of persons interested, form a new school district by the union of inhabitants of such adjoining towns, and may, for this purpose set off individuals with their taxable property, from existing districts; and it shall be the duty of the selectmen to define the districts so formed, by metes and bounds, and to cause the same to be recorded in their respective towns, and the selectmen of the town first incorporated may call the first meeting of the district so formed.

Restoring the District System would alleviate school district disputes over curricula and policy changes, such as the controversial International Baccalaureate program in Bedford. It  would allow families to join districts, which re-affirm their values and approach to learning. If necessary, multiple smaller districts could share pre-existing district buildings as is done in other states to minimize transportation and overhead costs.

NH public schools require students to take the New England Common Assessment Program or NECAP exams for reading, writing and arithmetic and also for science. These exams are administered three times during a student’s twelve years in elementary and secondary school.

Home educators are required to evaluate their children annually with much higher standards of accountability than public schools when using standardized testing.

The six home school “representatives” of the New Hampshire Home Education Advisory Council are appointed by the commissioner of the NH Department of Education.  These non-elected members do not represent the home schooling community.  

For twenty-two years the home schooling members of the HEAC have worked in opposition to the interests of the home schooling community by aligning themselves with out-of-state unregistered lobbyists [Home School Legal Defense Association of Virginia] to draft home education legislation.  These lobbyists were investigated by the NH Attorney General’s office during 2011 and found to be out-of-compliance with our lobbying laws, which constitutes a felony.

Many teenagers wait until they are 18 years of age to obtain a driver’s license without obtaining any formal driving instruction.  They cite the high cost of conventional driving instruction as the reason.

Other states use online drivers education programs. In California over 80,000 teenagers have taken online courses and are driving today.

Currently licensed parents supervise their unlicensed drivers on the road to complete their practice driving hours when taking conventional driving school programs.  

Under the proposed online driver education programs parents are required to undertake online training before supervising their teenagers on the road.

Under the New Hampshire Constitution, Pt. 1 Art. 28a, every state mandate enacted after 1984 must be fully funded. Nevertheless, many mandates are not fully funded and districts lack the funds to file a lawsuit against the State.    

The federal “Race to the Top” program promotes a national curriculum and national assessment standards.  States consider these policies in large part to receive federal grant money.  

Governor Perry stated that “Texas is on the right path toward improved education, and we would be foolish and irresponsible to place our children’s future in the hands of unelected bureaucrats and special interest groups thousands of miles away in Washington, virtually eliminating parents’ participation in their children’s education. If Washington were truly concerned about funding education with solutions that match local challenges, they would make the money available to states with no strings attached.”

The federal government is now asking school districts to bypass their governors and departments of education to adopt these policies – even when their state has explicitly refused to participate in their program like Texas has done.  
Districts should be allowed to implement whatever policy they feel is best for their students.  However, the danger is that some board members may accept these funds without fully realizing the increased fiscal implications. These programs erode and undermine local control as districts become dependent upon out-of-district funding.

Most districts, towns and cities use taxpayer funds to pay for membership dues in professional associations, which then use these same funds to hire lobbyists.  

Given that state education funds are intermingled with local funds, this use of education funds is already illegal.

NH RSA 15:5 I Prohibited Activities “…no recipient of a grant or appropriation of state funds may use the state funds to lobby or attempt to influence legislation, participate in political activity, or contribute funds to any entity engaged in these activities.”

Proposed change to the NH GOP Party Platform on September 30th that would protect local control of education:

Local Control and Education Funding 



As Republicans, our goal is to meet the cost of education as efficiently as possible. It is our belief that citizens who control their own education budgets have the strongest incentives to spend their money wisely. It is the position of the Republican Party that:

• Local control of education policy and education funding creates the best-managed school systems

• The New Hampshire Constitution should be amended to empower the people  _AT_THE_LOCAL_LEVEL_  [and their elected representatives] to set educational funding and policy goals

• State and federal school aid should not contain mandates that prevent parents and local taxpayers from making educational decisions for their own communities

• We demand that the federal government fully fund its commitment to special education mandates under the IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) and NCLB (No Child Left Behind)

We appreciate the time you have taken to answer our survey.  Your answers are valuable to us.