Important transparency issue

This part is significant:

• Advisory Group meetings do NOT have to be open to the public

• Their documents are NOT subject to public records (FOIA) requests

In short:

The public cannot attend these meetings or request their internal records.

This is unusual and may raise transparency concerns. I seriously have a problem with this. There is no way that it is reasonable that there is no transparency for this. In fact a report should be published at the end of the year with what the money was used for, and what was discovered by the research group.

I respectfully oppose House Bill 4034.

Public schools exist to serve students of all faiths and of no faith. Requiring the display of the Ten Commandments in every public school classroom crosses the constitutional line between freedom of religion and government endorsement of religion.

The language in this bill is not neutral or historical. It mandates a specific religious text, in a specific translation, presented prominently in every classroom. That is not about teaching history or civic values. It is a government requirement to display a religious doctrine, which directly conflicts with the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause.

West Virginia’s public schools educate Christian students, Jewish students, Muslim students, Hindu students, students of Indigenous traditions, and students who do not practice any religion. This bill elevates one religious tradition above all others and sends a clear message to many students that their beliefs, or lack thereof, are less welcome in their own classrooms.

I am also concerned about the precedent this bill sets. If the state can mandate the display of one religious text, it opens the door to political and religious pressure on schools that distracts from their core mission: educating children. Public schools should not be battlegrounds for religious or ideological mandates.

Parents already have the right to teach their children religious values at home and through their faith communities. That freedom is not under threat. What is under threat is the principle that public schools remain inclusive spaces governed by constitutional protections, not religious requirements.

West Virginia has many pressing education needs: teacher retention, classroom resources, student mental health, and academic outcomes. This bill does not address those needs.

For these reasons, I urge lawmakers to reject HB 4034.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

I respectfully oppose House Bill 4034, which would mandate that every classroom in West Virginia’s public elementary and secondary schools display a framed copy of the Ten Commandments.

This bill raises serious constitutional concerns. Public schools serve students of diverse faiths and belief systems — including Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Indigenous spiritual traditions, and those with no religious affiliation at all. A requirement to post a specific religious text in every classroom crosses the line between supporting students’ civic education and endorsing a particular religion or religious interpretation, which the U.S. Constitution’s Establishment Clause prohibits in public institutions.

Mandating the Ten Commandments does not foster inclusive education. Instead, it elevates one religious tradition above others and risks making students who do not share that tradition feel excluded or unwelcome in their own schools. Public education should be a neutral space where all students feel equally respected and supported.

There are already appropriate venues for religious education: families, communities, and religious organizations can teach religious values in contexts where such instruction is voluntary and welcome. Public schools, funded by all taxpayers and responsible for the education of all children, should not be compelled to promote specific religious content.

Moreover, the state faces pressing and practical challenges in education — including teacher recruitment and retention, classroom resources, student mental health services, and academic achievement gaps — that are far more urgent than the placement of religious posters in classrooms. Lawmakers should focus their efforts on policies that support the academic success, wellbeing, and equal treatment of all West Virginia students.

For these reasons, I urge members of the West Virginia Legislature to reject HB 4034.

• The First Amendment bars the government from endorsing religion in public schools. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down a nearly identical classroom mandate in Stone v. Graham (1980), holding that requiring the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms lacked a secular legislative purpose and violated the Establishment Clause.  
• The Court has also held that Ten Commandments displays are unconstitutional when the government’s purpose and context show a religious objective, as in McCreary County v. ACLU (2005).  
• Supporters sometimes cite Van Orden v. Perry (2005), but that case involved a long-standing outdoor monument on capitol grounds with a specific historical context—not a mandatory, universal classroom posting aimed at captive K-12 audiences.  

• Louisiana: A federal appeals court blocked Louisiana’s Ten Commandments classroom-display law as “plainly unconstitutional,” relying in part on Stone v. Graham.  
• Arkansas: A federal judge blocked enforcement of Arkansas’s law in several districts, finding it likely violates church-state separation principles.  
• Texas: A federal judge temporarily blocked Texas’s classroom-display law, and additional related injunctions/orders have required districts to remove postings while litigation continues.  

• HB 4034 requires universal classroom posting but does not create a clear statewide compliance/funding plan; it instead authorizes public spending to replace/buy displays.  
• The mandate increases the risk of diverting time and money from instruction and student services into compliance and legal defense.

Delegate Mallow,

Once again, the Legislature is being asked to spend its time and the public’s money advancing legislation that directly conflicts with the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

HB 4034 requires public schools to display a specific religious text—the Ten Commandments—in every classroom, in a prescribed size, format, and wording. This is not student religious liberty. This is government-mandated religious expression in a compulsory public setting. The distinction matters, and it has been settled law for decades.

Courts have already ruled on this issue. Repeatedly. Mandating the display of the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms constitutes government endorsement of religion, regardless of whether the materials are privately donated or publicly funded. Reintroducing this bill does not make it more constitutional; it only makes it more predictable that taxpayers will be left footing the bill for inevitable litigation.

As someone who works daily in public education, I find it deeply frustrating that this proposal is introduced while our schools face real, urgent challenges:
• Students struggling with basic literacy and numeracy
• Staffing shortages and burnout
• Underfunded special education and mental health supports
• Attendance and behavioral crises that materially impact learning

Schools do not need symbolic wall displays. They need resources, support, and evidence-based policy.

This bill also creates practical problems for districts: it is an unfunded mandate, it places administrators and teachers in the middle of a culture war they did not ask for, and it exposes school systems to legal risk for no educational benefit whatsoever.

Public schools serve students of many faiths and no faith at all. The Constitution protects everyone’s right to believe, not the government’s right to instruct.

I urge you to reconsider the priorities reflected in HB 4034 and to respect the longstanding constitutional principle of separation of church and state. Our students deserve serious solutions to serious problems, not performative legislation that distracts from the real work of improving education in West Virginia.

Respectfully,
Mariah Richards

I am writing to express my strong opposition and deep concern regarding the proposed legislation that would require the Ten Commandments to be displayed in all public schools. While I respect the religious and historical significance that these texts hold for many people, this bill represents a clear violation of the separation of church and state and an erosion of religious freedom, principles that are foundational to our democracy.

Public schools are not places of worship; they are spaces for learning, inclusion, and respect for students of all faiths and of no faith at all. Mandating a religious display endorsed by the state sends a chilling message to students and families whose beliefs differ. It risks alienating non-Christian students, undermining their sense of belonging and safety in schools that are meant to serve everyone equally.

This bill is not about history or morality, it is about government endorsement of a specific religious doctrine, which has been repeatedly ruled unconstitutional by federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court. Passing such a measure would invite costly legal challenges, divert public funds from classrooms, and sow division among communities.

If the goal is to promote character, ethics, and respect, there are inclusive ways to do so without elevating one faith tradition above others. We can teach civic values, empathy, and critical thinking through shared democratic principles, not religious mandates.

I urge lawmakers to reject this bill in defense of religious liberty, constitutional integrity, and the inclusive spirit of public education. Our students deserve schools that unite rather than divide, and legislation like this moves us dangerously in the opposite direction.

Is it possible to focus efforts for education on things that will actually help students? The Supreme Court of the United States has already ruled via Stone v. Graham (1980) that it is unconstitutional, a direct violation of the First Amendment to post the 10 Commandments or any other religious texts in public schools. All this will lead to is lawsuits that eat away state funds and time in court. It's already been struck down in states that have tried to do this in the courts as recently as 2025. We the people are tired of seeing the same bills that violate our constitutional rights be introduced session after session. Unless you are going to also post religious texts of the 4,000 other recognized religions in this world, which would still violate the religious rights of those who are agnostic or atheist because you can't have freedom of religion without freedom from religion, then you have no constitutional right or authority to post the 10 Commandments in public schools. Would it make you comfortable if schools posted texts for the Quran? Pagan or Wiccan texts? Beliefs of L Ron Hubbard for Scientology?

Separation of Church and State

• Stone v. Graham (1980): The Supreme Court specifically struck down a law requiring the Ten Commandments in classrooms, holding it was an inherently religious, not educational, action.
• McCreary County v. ACLU (2005): Affirmed that government displays of the Ten Commandments are unconstitutional when they have a religious purpose.
• Coercion Doctrine: Argue that, because public school attendance is mandatory, displaying the Ten Commandments creates a captive audience and coerces religious expression upon students. 

The Establishment clause of the first amendment prohibits governments from making any law respecting an establishment of religion. Because of this, as well as ethical problems, this bill is a terrible idea. In order for this bill to have a chance at passing, the opposition must show the motive is purely secular and not at all religious. Representative Noble, for example, has tried getting around this by saying the Ten Commandments are a foundational document in our history. Would this truly make the motive secular? In 1980, the Supreme Court ruled the Ten Commandments in schools was unconstitutional. They noted the Commandments had no educational purpose, seeing as they’re merely hanging on a wall, and they promoted religious belief. A good way to see the promotion religious motivation in this bill is to look at what they are putting forth: The Ten Commandments. They don’t only command the absence from stealing or murder, but from the worship other gods. “Thou shalt not have any other gods before me.” Before who? Yahweh. Not only that, they also talk about the sabbath. “Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.” Is the sabbath in Hinduism? Is it in buddhism? Imagine the Hindu boys and girls sitting in class looking at the first and fourth commandment, one of which directly attacks their belief. How could this not be religious? Furthermore, which version of the Commandments should be posted? Allowing the government to meddle in religious doctrine is problematic for the people of that religion; allowing religion to meddle in the government is problematic for all others.

As a Christian, I do not support requiring public school classrooms to display the Ten Commandments. Public education exists to serve students and families of many different faiths and belief systems, and it should remain a place where no single religious doctrine is promoted or imposed.

Taxpayer dollars, instructional time, and administrative energy are limited. These resources should be focused on improving literacy, math achievement, student mental health, school safety, teacher retention, and addressing chronic absenteeism...not on symbolic measures that do not improve student learning outcomes.

Faith is deeply personal and meaningful, but it is most powerful when chosen freely, not mandated by the government. Just as we would not expect Islamic, Jewish, or other religious texts to be posted in public school classrooms, we should not require Christian doctrine either. Religious freedom includes the freedom from having beliefs imposed by the state.

Our schools are facing real, urgent challenges. We should be prioritizing policies that strengthen education for all students rather than creating unnecessary division or distractions from the work that truly matters.

The ten commandments are a religous idea. A religous idea should not be affiliated with public schools. Religion should be kept separate. Students who do not believe should not have to believe they have to follow the commandments.

• “The term separation of church and state came from one letter by Thomas Jefferson to a congregation.” “The first amendment was to keep the government out of religion, not religion from government.” “The establishment clause was to keep from establishing a National Religion.” “States established their own religions prior to the constitution.” “Separation of church and state is a myth.”
  1. This is incorrect in many ways. Both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison both made countless statements about the need to keep the two entities separate. Whether using this term in full or not, the intent is clear
     1. Thomas Jefferson: “[E]very one must act according to the dictates of his own reason, and mine tells me that civil powers alone have been given to the President of the U.S. and no authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents.” To Rev. Samuel Miller, January 23, 1808
     2. Thomas Jefferson: “Our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions…therefore the proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to the offices of trust and emolument, unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion, is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages to which in common with his fellow citizens he has a natural right” -“Virginia Act for Establishing Religious Freedom” 1786

• Thomas Jefferson: “…yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as it was in his Almighty power to do; that the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavouring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world, and through all time; that to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical…” – “Virginia Act for Establishing Religious Freedom” 1786

1. Thomas Jefferson: “As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion” – Treaty of Tripoli Article 11 1797
2. James Madison: “[T]he number, the industry, and the morality of the Priesthood, & the devotion of the people have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the Church from the State." - Letter to Robert Walsh, March 2, 1819
3. James Madison: “The members of a Govt as such can in no sense, be regarded as possessing an advisory trust from their Constituents in their religious capacities.” – Journal Entry

• Thomas Jefferson wrote the “Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom” that formally severed ties between the state government of Virginia and the Church of England.
• James Madison wrote “Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments” in 1785, before he wrote the First Amendment, where he wrote in opposition to a proposal by Patrick Henry that all Virginians be taxed to support “teachers of the Christian religion.” To this day it is one of the most detailed writings against the government establishing of a state sponsored religion.

1. Thomas Jeferson and the infamous letter to Danbury Baptist: “...I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State" - Letter to Danbury Baptists Association 1802
   1. This has been used time and time again to express and confirm this founding father’s position on the Establishment Clause and the Free-Exercise Clause.
   2. This is the one many pastors and political leaders have been quoting saying that this is the origin of this concept of “separation of church and state.” However, it is not the first instance nor is it the only instance that this concept is discussed by our constitutional framers and founders.
2. There are more quotes from these two below in the link I provided as-well-as being easy to find online and other sources.

1. These men didn’t even believe that government should make any form of religious proclamations as well, like calling for national prayer. It could not be more clear.
2. States that had established, state sponsored religions slowly phased this out after adopting the United States Constitution, the last being Massachusetts in 1833.
3. What many historians gather from these men is that they believed that for Religion and Government to both flourish, they must do so on their own. That religion is best suited without government influence, and that government is best suited without religious influence. Religion does inform us, but it should not dictate.

• “The bible is the main inspiration of our founding documents.”
  1. This is not true, while the Bible informed many of our founding fathers in their basis of morality, they sought many secular sources to inform how they wanted our nation to be setup from our founding documents. Including: the Magna Carta, English Bill of Rights, English Common Law (stemming from Anglo-Saxon principles and ideas that predate Christianized Anglo-Saxon Groups).
  2. The First Amendment, penned by James Madison took inspiration from Thomas Jefferson’s “Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom” which was penned to end the state of Virginia’s state sponsored religious ties to the Church of England, in 1786. It established that no individual could be forced to attend or support any religious institution or suffer penalties for their beliefs. This is a clear indication to Thomas Jefferson’s intent to keep states themselves from establishing a religion within their own state.
• “The ten commandments informed our Bill of Rights and is as foundational as the constitution.” “The Ten Commandments influenced our laws.”
  1. The only similarity here is that there are ten amendments within the Bill of Rights and ten commandments. There is no historic proof that there is any inter-relation there. Just look at them in order and read. “Thou shalt have no other g*ds before me, does not inspire the Establishment or Free Exercise Clause, they are antithetical.
  2. The only commandments we see that are similar to laws that we have are to not kill or steal. There are no laws against children talking back to their parents, being jealous of your neighbors, lying (under most circumstances), or adultery (those phased out). To not kill and to not steal are two very common moral standings of most cultures – regardless of religion.
• “The Bible is the foundation of Western Civilization.”
  1. Rome was founded in 753 B.C. Western civilization was well established before the Christian Bible as we know it was formed in the 5^th Century AD. There were groups and civilizations where influences are still seen today that were not Christianized until much later.
• “The Aitken Bible teaches us a lot about the history of our nation and events during the Revolutionary War.”
  1. The website for The First American Bible, the group that will be providing these $200 Bibles, paid for by donations to them, offers only one lesson plan. That lesson plan is divided into three topics, and only one discusses the Aitken Bible.
  2. The Aitken Bible only has a few paragraphs discussing these events and how it came to be.
  3. The Aitken Bible lost money during production and Congress did not seek to fund it, few copies were made because it was not being purchased.
  4. Senator Bartlett claimed that it could teach students about printing methods at the time, the edition being given is not a replica. It is printed using modern production techniques.
• “This is for educational purposes only, not religious.”
  1. Opinion/Observation: if it was for educational purposes, why are we not also championing the supply of our foundational documents to the same classrooms? The organization behind the bibles “First American Bible” only supply one lesson plan on this specific Bible, yet it cost $200 for one lesson? The notion appears, to me, to be to slowly introduce religion in the classroom and into state government. Going against the very wishes of the men who originated our Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Senator Grady went on to list content standards on the Revolutionary period, including “contributions by western Virginia” to demonstrate how this specific bible could be used to align with state standards. The Bible wasn’t even printed in western Virginia, most of the content standards she listed would apply very loosely.
  2. It is the 250^th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, why are these same lawmakers not trying to make, at least, this document available to teachers to use as supplement and a physical representation of the very document that made us the country that we are today?

This bill seems to be a dramatic cut to school boards (no more than 27). In many cases, schools must compete for attention, funding, and staff even within their own county. In addition to this, I can't imagine the affect this may have on personal matters, especially in relation to Reduction in Force (RIF). I fear this is another attack in the decades long battle on public education.

I disagree because bringing boards together would do nothing but damage with multiple opinions. It also might make it hard to understand students situations.

I recognize that West Virginia’s public education system faces serious challenges related to enrollment decline, funding pressures, and regional capacity. Exploring structural changes is reasonable, and a study on school district unification is not inherently misguided.

However, HB 4037 goes too far by mandating consolidation before the study is completed. While the bill directs the State Board of Education to evaluate unification options, it simultaneously locks the state into reducing 55 districts to no more than 27 by July 1, 2029, regardless of what that analysis may show. This places the conclusion ahead of the evidence.

Large scale consolidation in a rural, geographically complex state carries significant risks. Past regionalization efforts (i.e. RESAs) have shown that consolidation does not automatically result in cost savings, improved services, or better outcomes. Yet this bill lacks critical detail regarding governance, fiscal accountability, staffing impacts, community representation, and operational feasibility.

If consolidation is to be considered, it should be data driven, incremental, and regionally flexible, with clear success metrics and meaningful stakeholder input. I urge the Legislature to remove or delay the mandatory consolidation deadline and allow the study process to genuinely guide future action.

Reform of this magnitude demands caution, transparency, and evidence and not predetermined outcomes.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Mariah Richards

I am writing to express my strong opposition to HB 4100, the so-called “Baby Olivia Act.” This bill mandates that public schools use specific materials—such as the Live Action “Meet Baby Olivia” video—to teach students about fetal development. These materials are not rooted in peer‑reviewed, scientifically validated research, but rather reflect a particular ideological perspective.

Education, particularly in human biology and health, must be based on credible science and evidence, not propaganda designed to promote a political or religious agenda. If this bill passes and my children’s schools are required to comply, I will remove my children from class on the days this content is taught. Parents should not be forced to have their children taught content that substitutes ideology for science.

HB 4100 prioritizes beliefs over evidence, and in doing so, it undermines both education and trust in public schools. I urge you to vote against this bill to protect science-based instruction and respect parents’ rights.

I am writing to express my strong opposition and deep concern regarding the proposed legislation that would require the Ten Commandments to be displayed in all public schools. While I respect the religious and historical significance that these texts hold for many people, this bill represents a clear violation of the separation of church and state and an erosion of religious freedom, principles that are foundational to our democracy.

Public schools are not places of worship; they are spaces for learning, inclusion, and respect for students of all faiths and of no faith at all. Mandating a religious display endorsed by the state sends a chilling message to students and families whose beliefs differ. It risks alienating non-Christian students, undermining their sense of belonging and safety in schools that are meant to serve everyone equally.

This bill is not about history or morality, it is about government endorsement of a specific religious doctrine, which has been repeatedly ruled unconstitutional by federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court. Passing such a measure would invite costly legal challenges, divert public funds from classrooms, and sow division among communities.

If the goal is to promote character, ethics, and respect, there are inclusive ways to do so without elevating one faith tradition above others. We can teach civic values, empathy, and critical thinking through shared democratic principles, not religious mandates.

I urge lawmakers to reject this bill in defense of religious liberty, constitutional integrity, and the inclusive spirit of public education. Our students deserve schools that unite rather than divide, and legislation like this moves us dangerously in the opposite direction.

• “The term separation of church and state came from one letter by Thomas Jefferson to a congregation.” “The first amendment was to keep the government out of religion, not religion from government.” “The establishment clause was to keep from establishing a National Religion.” “States established their own religions prior to the constitution.” “Separation of church and state is a myth.”
  1. This is incorrect in many ways. Both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison both made countless statements about the need to keep the two entities separate. Whether using this term in full or not, the intent is clear
     1. Thomas Jefferson: “[E]very one must act according to the dictates of his own reason, and mine tells me that civil powers alone have been given to the President of the U.S. and no authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents.” To Rev. Samuel Miller, January 23, 1808
     2. Thomas Jefferson: “Our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions…therefore the proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to the offices of trust and emolument, unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion, is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages to which in common with his fellow citizens he has a natural right” -“Virginia Act for Establishing Religious Freedom” 1786

• Thomas Jefferson: “…yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as it was in his Almighty power to do; that the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavouring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world, and through all time; that to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical…” – “Virginia Act for Establishing Religious Freedom” 1786

1. Thomas Jefferson: “As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion” – Treaty of Tripoli Article 11 1797
2. James Madison: “[T]he number, the industry, and the morality of the Priesthood, & the devotion of the people have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the Church from the State." - Letter to Robert Walsh, March 2, 1819
3. James Madison: “The members of a Govt as such can in no sense, be regarded as possessing an advisory trust from their Constituents in their religious capacities.” – Journal Entry

• Thomas Jefferson wrote the “Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom” that formally severed ties between the state government of Virginia and the Church of England.
• James Madison wrote “Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments” in 1785, before he wrote the First Amendment, where he wrote in opposition to a proposal by Patrick Henry that all Virginians be taxed to support “teachers of the Christian religion.” To this day it is one of the most detailed writings against the government establishing of a state sponsored religion.

1. Thomas Jeferson and the infamous letter to Danbury Baptist: “...I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State" - Letter to Danbury Baptists Association 1802
   1. This has been used time and time again to express and confirm this founding father’s position on the Establishment Clause and the Free-Exercise Clause.
   2. This is the one many pastors and political leaders have been quoting saying that this is the origin of this concept of “separation of church and state.” However, it is not the first instance nor is it the only instance that this concept is discussed by our constitutional framers and founders.
2. There are more quotes from these two below in the link I provided as-well-as being easy to find online and other sources.

1. These men didn’t even believe that government should make any form of religious proclamations as well, like calling for national prayer. It could not be more clear.
2. States that had established, state sponsored religions slowly phased this out after adopting the United States Constitution, the last being Massachusetts in 1833.
3. What many historians gather from these men is that they believed that for Religion and Government to both flourish, they must do so on their own. That religion is best suited without government influence, and that government is best suited without religious influence. Religion does inform us, but it should not dictate.

• “The bible is the main inspiration of our founding documents.”
  1. This is not true, while the Bible informed many of our founding fathers in their basis of morality, they sought many secular sources to inform how they wanted our nation to be setup from our founding documents. Including: the Magna Carta, English Bill of Rights, English Common Law (stemming from Anglo-Saxon principles and ideas that predate Christianized Anglo-Saxon Groups).
  2. The First Amendment, penned by James Madison took inspiration from Thomas Jefferson’s “Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom” which was penned to end the state of Virginia’s state sponsored religious ties to the Church of England, in 1786. It established that no individual could be forced to attend or support any religious institution or suffer penalties for their beliefs. This is a clear indication to Thomas Jefferson’s intent to keep states themselves from establishing a religion within their own state.
• “The ten commandments informed our Bill of Rights and is as foundational as the constitution.” “The Ten Commandments influenced our laws.”
  1. The only similarity here is that there are ten amendments within the Bill of Rights and ten commandments. There is no historic proof that there is any inter-relation there. Just look at them in order and read. “Thou shalt have no other g*ds before me, does not inspire the Establishment or Free Exercise Clause, they are antithetical.
  2. The only commandments we see that are similar to laws that we have are to not kill or steal. There are no laws against children talking back to their parents, being jealous of your neighbors, lying (under most circumstances), or adultery (those phased out). To not kill and to not steal are two very common moral standings of most cultures – regardless of religion.
• “The Bible is the foundation of Western Civilization.”
  1. Rome was founded in 753 B.C. Western civilization was well established before the Christian Bible as we know it was formed in the 5^th Century AD. There were groups and civilizations where influences are still seen today that were not Christianized until much later.
• “The Aitken Bible teaches us a lot about the history of our nation and events during the Revolutionary War.”
  1. The website for The First American Bible, the group that will be providing these $200 Bibles, paid for by donations to them, offers only one lesson plan. That lesson plan is divided into three topics, and only one discusses the Aitken Bible.
  2. The Aitken Bible only has a few paragraphs discussing these events and how it came to be.
  3. The Aitken Bible lost money during production and Congress did not seek to fund it, few copies were made because it was not being purchased.
  4. Senator Bartlett claimed that it could teach students about printing methods at the time, the edition being given is not a replica. It is printed using modern production techniques.
• “This is for educational purposes only, not religious.”
  1. Opinion/Observation: if it was for educational purposes, why are we not also championing the supply of our foundational documents to the same classrooms? The organization behind the bibles “First American Bible” only supply one lesson plan on this specific Bible, yet it cost $200 for one lesson? The notion appears, to me, to be to slowly introduce religion in the classroom and into state government. Going against the very wishes of the men who originated our Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Senator Grady went on to list content standards on the Revolutionary period, including “contributions by western Virginia” to demonstrate how this specific bible could be used to align with state standards. The Bible wasn’t even printed in western Virginia, most of the content standards she listed would apply very loosely.
  2. It is the 250^th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, why are these same lawmakers not trying to make, at least, this document available to teachers to use as supplement and a physical representation of the very document that made us the country that we are today?

Delegate Crouse

It’s difficult to reconcile requiring cameras in schools while opposing cameras in legislative committees. Transparency should start with lawmakers.

I disagree with this bill because allowing teachers to carry firearms in schools, filled with children and other educators, could go wrong in many different ways. What if a teacher that is eligible to carry a firearm in school has a bad “break through” due to a situation outside of school and is now putting students and other educators in danger? What if a student somehow gains possession of the firearm? These are things that we need to think about before saying that it’s a good idea.

This bill should not be passed because teachers, although less likely than students to commit school shootings, are still capable. Teachers and staff, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office from 2009 to 2019, account for 4% of school shootings, totaling to 14 school shootings committed by teachers. Taken into consideration, as well, how easy would it be for students to find and take a teacher’s gun? Too many risks to consider before passing this bill, therefore I believe this bill should be denied.

I highly disagree. 

Letting teachers carry guns in schools might seem like it will make students safer, but it’ll only do more harm than good. Teachers aren’t trained like security guards or policemen, so in a real emergency they’re more prone to making mistakes. Mistakes that can lead to someone being injured, or worse. For example, a teacher could end up shooting at another armed teacher during an emergency, thinking they posed a threat, or a student could steal a teacher’s gun and use it against them. Having guns in classrooms would make students and teachers feel more scared than safe. Furthermore, It would cost a lot of money for training and insurance, money that can be put into things like improving school lunch, equipment, or remodeling a certain area in the school. Instead of allowing unqualified teachers to carry a concealed weapon on school grounds, the board should work on things that can actually protect students, like better security, surveillance systems, or support for their mental health. 

As a West Virginia constituent in Beckley, Raleigh County, I oppose HB 4583.

West Virginia schools and families are facing urgent, practical needs right now: staffing shortages, student mental health, attendance barriers, facility needs, and the everyday strain many households are carrying. This bill does not respond to those realities. Instead, it directs school time and state attention toward a symbolic political observance that is not rooted in West Virginia’s specific history or current priorities.

I support teaching accurate, evidence-based history, including the harms of authoritarian regimes across the world. But HB 4583 is not written as a balanced, academically grounded standard. It mandates a specific annual observance and a required lesson framed through a political lens, placing schools in the middle of culture-war messaging rather than education. When the Legislature tells educators what conclusions to emphasize, it risks turning learning into propaganda and undermining professional teaching standards.

Public education should build critical thinking skills, civic literacy, and the ability to evaluate power and policy using facts, context, and multiple perspectives. If the state is going to require additional instructional time, it should be for priorities that measurably benefit West Virginia students and strengthen public schools, not for a partisan signal that distracts from real work.

Please vote no on HB 4583 and focus legislative effort on policies that materially improve the lives, education, and well-being of West Virginians.

This is the laziest piece of partisan legislation I’ve ever seen. Just buy Trump coin instead of putting your name on something so stupid.

• Special education
• Art teacher
• Conservation biology
• Health and human services
• History teacher
• Developmental psychology (children)
• Social work
• Elementary education
• Child development
• Educational psychology
• Middle school education
• Early childhood education 
• high school education

Dear Members of the West Virginia House Education Committee,

I am writing as a lifelong West Virginian and as a PhD candidate in Leadership Studies with an emphasis in Public Administration to share serious concerns regarding the proposed federal voucher-style tax credit program and the possibility of West Virginia opting into it.

While the program is framed as a tax credit of up to $3,400 for families, it functions in practice as a voucher program. Like other voucher programs, it diverts public resources away from public education and into private institutions. Regardless of the mechanism, the end result is the same: public money no longer supporting public schools.

It is also important to be clear that this is not “free money” for states. These tax credits reduce federal tax revenue—revenue that would otherwise support public education, infrastructure, healthcare, and other essential public services. For a state already struggling to maintain adequate funding levels, this tradeoff should not be taken lightly.

Recent research reinforces these concerns. A study by RAND examining West Virginia’s Hope Scholarship found that expanding vouchers to families already sending their children to private school was an inefficient use of public funds. This proposal replicates that same inefficiency by subsidizing decisions families have already made, rather than meaningfully expanding access or improving educational outcomes.

Additionally, it remains unclear whether—or how—public school students would actually be able to utilize this program until all federal regulations are finalized. Opting into a program without knowing how eligibility, oversight, and implementation will function places the state in a reactive position rather than one of responsible governance.

The role of Scholarship Granting Organizations raises further concern. These organizations are permitted to retain up to 10 percent of donated funds for administrative purposes. When those donations are incentivized through tax credits, that retained portion effectively comes from public tax dollars. This structure creates the appearance, at minimum, of a money-making scheme layered on top of public finance.

It is also worth noting that this program is voluntary. States are not required to opt in. West Virginia already operates a voucher-style program through the Hope Scholarship. Adding another program before fully assessing the long-term fiscal and educational impacts of the first only compounds uncertainty.

Until federal regulations are fully released, it is unclear how much authority states will retain to regulate or oversee this program. Committing state policy without knowing the rules is neither prudent nor consistent with sound public administration.

Finally, I believe it would be irresponsible for a state that is hemorrhaging its tax base, struggling to provide basic public services, and simultaneously considering further cuts to public funding to take on additional fiscal risk. West Virginia’s public schools, infrastructure, and healthcare systems are already under strain. Weakening them further does not serve our long-term economic or social stability.

My concern is not ideological. It is rooted in fiscal responsibility, public trust, and the basic obligation of government to steward limited resources wisely. I urge the committee to approach this proposal with caution and to prioritize transparency, accountability, and the long-term interests of West Virginia’s communities.

The purpose of this bill seems to push private and charter school programs. This takes funding away from rural and poverty areas within WV. All children deserve free and accessible education not just the elite and wealthy. We cannot expect success when adequate and sustainable resources are not provided to a system  of public education. The children in public schools deserve proper funding this bill diverting funds to scholarships or vouchers undermines the effectiveness and success of our public education system.

I strongly support Delegate Pritt’s bill proposing a 25% raise for West Virginia teachers. As an educator who has worked in multiple educational settings and has chosen to serve in a West Virginia public school, I have seen firsthand how low teacher pay directly affects staffing, morale, and student outcomes.

West Virginia teachers earn significantly less than educators in surrounding states, making it increasingly difficult to recruit and retain qualified teachers. Many talented educators leave for neighboring states or leave the profession entirely, not because they lack commitment to students, but because they cannot afford to stay. This constant turnover disrupts learning, strains remaining staff, and ultimately harms students.

A 25% raise is not excessive. It is corrective. It is a necessary step toward making teacher pay competitive and recognizing the professional skill, time, and emotional labor required to educate today’s students. Teachers are expected to address academic gaps, mental health needs, trauma, and family instability, often with fewer resources and increasing demands.

Investing in teachers is an investment in students, communities, and the future of West Virginia. If we want strong schools, stable classrooms, and long-term economic growth, we must value educators in a tangible way. Delegate Pritt’s bill is a meaningful step in the right direction, and it deserves serious consideration and support.

What for? Most of you in Charleston don’t know about it….or just choose not to follow it.

My daughter has wrestled the last 4 years. Not passing this Bill will keep girls from joining. Its a double edge sword. Girls are afraid to wrestle boys, because some location dont allow for that. While there are many schools that are building Girls Teams, WV is falling behind because this fast growing sport is not sanctioned. As a parent we are begging and pleading you pass this Bill.

Sanctioning women’s wrestling would be a huge move for our state!! My daughter has wrestled for 5 years and we’ve seen it grow more and more each year. She currently starts varsity at Hurricane Middle school, was also varsity last year and has multiple state championships. We’ve hoped since she started that she would have better opportunities once she got to high school. Please make this an opportunity!!

Been needed to happen catch our girls up to the rest of the nation 💯

This is the fastest growing girls sport and WV is falling behind. Yes, my granddaughter wrestles and I'm very proud of her. Please pass House Bill 4834. Sincerely, Donna Lori Shaffer

Please make girls wrestling a sanction sport.

I support the sanctioning of a women's wrestling division in which only biological, XX, females participate.

This is a no brainer, of course girls wrestling should be a sanctioned sport in WV High Schools! Girls wrestling is the fastest growing girls sport in the US since 2021.

• Woman’s wrestling is the fastest growing High School Sport in the US.
• In 2025, there were over 74,000 women and girls wrestling competitively at the high school level and more than 1,200 at the collegiate level in the United States.
• As of April 2024, there were 146 women's college wrestling programs and 77 clubs, including 85 NCAA programs and 47 NAIA programs. Concord University recently added a women’s wrestling program and we wish Concord the best in growing their team. BTY Concord – we have some wrestlers you should look at! Women's wrestling is one of the fastest-growing college sports.
• Competitive women wrestlers are being recruited by colleges as early as their freshmen year of high school.
• Wrestling ranks 2nd among sports for producing 1st generation college students. No sport does more to facilitate upward educational, occupational, or financial mobility.
• The number of women’s scholarships allowed per women’s college wrestling team has increased from 10 per team to 30 per team.
• Wrestlers are highly valued and recruited by all military branches.
• Wrestling is an exceptionally inclusive sport that is open to individuals of all sizes, backgrounds, and abilities. It is also highly accessible for all socioeconomic levels compared to other sports.
• Wrestling provides girls with life skills and experiences such as hard work, sacrifice, teamwork, discipline, personal responsibility, confidence, mental & physical toughness, respect.
• Wrestling provides girls with an opportunity to take advantage of post-secondary opportunities.
• Wrestling provides opportunities for international competition and international travel.
• Wrestling develops skills which will assist in success in other sports such as track, softball, soccer.

1. Please support Bill 4834 which will sanction wrestling for girls.

1. Undefined funding source / amount

• The bill requires the “foundation allowance for instructional funding” to be distributed directly and equally to teachers, but it does not define which line-items or how much money qualifies as “instructional funding,” nor how the amount per teacher is calculated.  
• Without definitions, this could cause inconsistent implementation across counties and budget confusion.

2. “Direct and equal” distribution may not match classroom needs

• HB 4860 mandates funding be equal to teachers rather than based on student enrollment, grade level, subject area (e.g., CTE/labs), special education needs, or classroom size.  
• Equal distribution can be simple, but it can also misalign with real cost differences between classrooms.

3. Procurement controls are reduced

• The bill explicitly exempts purchases from district vendor registration and quote requirements.  
• Those controls exist to prevent waste, favoritism, and price-gouging. Removing them increases risk and makes it harder to ensure best value for taxpayers.

4. Account ownership / liability is unclear

• The account is held in the teacher’s name for “exclusive use,” funded by state deposits, and accessed by P-card.  
• The bill does not address what happens when a teacher transfers, resigns, is terminated, or retires (e.g., who controls remaining funds, how funds are recovered, and who is liable for disputed charges).

5. Online publication is transparency—but could create privacy/safety issues

• Publishing purchases online may improve transparency, but HB 4860 does not specify what details must be posted (vendor name, item description, campus/teacher identifier, redactions).  
• If postings are tied to individual teachers, it could expose staff to harassment or targeted complaints while they are trying to supply classrooms.

6. Training is required, but enforcement/auditing is not

• The bill requires the State Auditor to provide training, but it does not set audit intervals, penalties, dispute processes, or enforcement mechanisms for misuse.  

• Define “foundation allowance for instructional funding” and specify the appropriation/budget mechanism.
• Restore basic procurement safeguards (e.g., allow exemptions only up to a dollar threshold; require receipts/itemization; restrict certain merchant categories).
• Add clear rules for allowable purchases, returns, lost/stolen cards, fraud reporting, and what happens to funds when employment ends.
• Require standardized transparency postings with redaction rules and no personally identifying details beyond what is necessary.

Even though the bill sounds great in theory, starting late means that students would get less days for breaks throughout the year to reach the 180 day requirement.

I strongly urge legislators to reconsider a rigid 180-day student calendar and instead support a more flexible model, such as 170 instructional days for students while maintaining 200-day teacher contracts.

Research does not show a meaningful academic difference between 180 days and slightly shorter calendars unless the added time is used for high-quality instruction. National studies and federal reviews consistently find that simply adding days produces only modest gains at best, while the quality of instruction, targeted intervention, and teacher preparation time matter far more. Several states already operate below 180 days or use hours-based requirements with no loss of accountability.

Reducing the student calendar to 170 days or focus on hours-based instruction would not reduce teacher pay or contracts, but it would create intentional time for professional development, data-driven instruction, parent communication, and-critically-IEP meetings and special education compliance. Currently, these legally required responsibilities are often completed by teachers during planning periods, after school, or on personal time. A 170-day student calendar would allow districts to meet federal and state mandates without asking teachers to sacrifice instructional planning time that directly benefits students.

There is also a fiscal benefit. While most education costs are fixed, districts can realize modest but real savings in transportation, food service, and building operations when student days are reduced-without cutting salaries. Those savings can and should be reinvested into tutoring, attendance supports, and teacher retention.

West Virginia does not need more seat-time mandates. We need smarter use of time. A flexible calendar that protects 200-day teacher contracts while reducing student days to 170 is a practical, research-supported solution that prioritizes instructional quality, compliance, and educator sustainability.

This bill would be an extremely positive change for the public school system.

“I strongly support this bill to align the school calendar with a start date of the Tuesday after Labor Day and an end date of the Friday before Memorial Day. This schedule provides consistency and predictability for families, educators, and communities across the state.

Beginning school after Labor Day allows students and teachers to start the year well-rested and prepared, leading to stronger engagement and smoother transitions at the start of the academic year. Ending before Memorial Day helps reduce instructional disruptions caused by late-spring fatigue and improves attendance during the final weeks of school.

This calendar also benefits working families by offering clearer planning for childcare and summer employment, supports local economies that rely on summer tourism, and promotes a healthier balance between instructional time and student well-being. Overall, this change would create a more effective, family-friendly, and student-centered school year.

I am a West Virginia public school teacher with 20 years of experience across multiple grade levels, from elementary education to high school Career and Technical Education. I fully support accountability and high-quality instruction, but the current 180-day mandate prioritizes seat time over meaningful learning—particularly in West Virginia, where winter weather regularly disrupts the school calendar. When schools are forced to extend into June to “make up” days, the result is often supervision rather than instruction, which raises real concerns about how we define educational success for our students.

State testing schedules and graduation timelines in West Virginia do not move. Elementary and middle school testing occurs in early May, with SAT and CTE NOCTI testing scheduled in that same general window. High school seniors graduate by the end of May. Teachers continue working until the final contracted day, but once testing and graduation are complete, the system has already determined when meaningful academic instruction ends. Extending the school calendar beyond that point does not improve outcomes and instead creates concerns about student engagement, attendance, and instructional effectiveness.

Reducing the mandate to 160 days would allow West Virginia schools the flexibility to focus on quality over quantity while still holding educators accountable for student learning. West Virginia teachers have consistently shown they can adapt, prioritize standards, and deliver results even when weather-related disruptions occur. This proposal reflects the realities faced by our students, families, and educators and places meaningful learning—not optics—at the center of policy decisions. I would welcome the opportunity to discuss these concerns further with anyone, from the perspective of someone who has truly seen education at every level and understands how these decisions impact West Virginia classrooms.

I believe This bill will be absolutely helpful. If we could pass this bill and Eliminate the spring breaks that we in Wv always get when weather is still bad, we would be able to have the 160 days instructional days, as well as Pl days w staff to to be able to do better by our students and schools.

1. As a paraprofessional, this bill should definitely be passed! Students are struggling when expected to go 180 and when we have all these snow days, it just makes it worse. We shouldn’t be held accountable for things out of our control. Let’s go back to the way it was. We don’t need all these weeks off during the school year!! Let’s pass this bill of the sake of our students!!

1. Specifying attached support rooms (sensory rooms, break rooms, focus rooms, etc) be included in the code.

1. Requiring county boards to maintaining video/audio footage for two years. The cost of upgrading existing systems is an undue expense on LEAs without a fiscal note to support this change in Code.
2. Requiring new audio devices for staff while changing a student in an unattached restroom. The initial cost for any classroom staff to be equipped with a new, portable audio device and storage of additional audio files for at least 365 years is another undue burden on counties. NOTE: IDEA (federal funds) cannot be spent on any of these anticipated costs. It is not an allowable cost.

1. What if a staff member refuses to wear a portable audio device? I anticipate many refusing or filing a grievance, creating additional stress and costs on an LEA.
2. What if there are general education students in the unattached restroom? Do their parents have any rights to refuse their child to be recorded on an audio device? We have many changing areas within the girls/boys restrooms in the schools. What legal protections/guidance can be provided to counties to avoid additional grievances and parental complaints?

1. Requiring 15 minutes of audio/video review every SEVEN days (instead of 90). Some schools in Kanawha County have four self contained classrooms with attached restroom and a sensory area. This would require two hours and 15 minutes a week (for ONE school) of just listening/reviewing audio and video files, including the documentation. KCS has over 50 schools.  While I understand the intent for increased protection of our students, this is an unrealistic, legal burden to place on LEA/school staff. I would recommend considering 60 calendar days, instead of 90 days.
2. Allowing parents to retain video footage for 60 days past the statute of limitations. Parents or guardians are permitted to view the footage at anytime, multiple times, with any legal representative. Allowing copies of the footage would not only infringe on other students/staff confidentiality that may also be on the footage, it is not going to increase any protection of our vulnerable students. It will only create additional sharing of inaccurate information over social media platforms in which LEAs have no control of the dialogue or false statements made in response.
3. Allowing parents/guardians to view footage outside of an alleged incident with no legal definition of a "reasonable request".  LEAs have a solid process of any parental/guardian concern to be screened and reported. Student confidentiality MUST be maintained and this would allow parents/guardians to view footage that would not involve their own child, a clear violation of FERPA and student confidentiality.

• WVU maintained and renewed international partnerships with foreign universities and energy entities during the same years it cited financial crisis to justify domestic program cuts
• These agreements covered energy research, language instruction, and international exchanges
• Senior leadership approved or renewed these agreements while domestic language, culture, and DEI programs were eliminated

• Environmental monitoring gaps
• Public health risks
• Energy and infrastructure funding transparency
• Agency refusal to exercise jurisdiction despite acknowledging complaints

• First Amendment protections (speech, academic freedom, association)
• Equal protection, particularly for communities not aligned with state-preferred cultural or moral frameworks

• The new section §16-11A-1 makes it a felony “to attend any public-school function or attend or participate in public school or athletic events in any capacity, regardless of participation by offender’s own children” for those required to register on the WV “sex offender registry.”
  • It is restrictive and inclusive to registrants on the “sex offender registry” only, while allowing all other “Central Abuse Registry” registrants with misdemeanor or felony offenses constituting child abuse or neglect, free to attend school events, as well as all other persons with past convictions for murder, assault, etc.
  • It is broad in its language, prohibiting a total ban for said registrants without any exceptions, such as parent-teacher conferences, expulsion hearings, and reviews.
  • It is not based on any current disruptive behavior but rather past behavior/convictions that, in many cases, are decades old.
  • As written, it violates the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, the Plaintiff has a right to due process in any proceedings initiated by a governmental authority. ( in Supp. 4, ECF No. 7) In this case, no due process rights are afforded to registrants before they are banned from school property.
    • In Cole v. Montague Bd. of Educ., 145 Fed.Appx. 760, 762-63 (3d Cir. 2005) (citing Lovern, 190 F.3d at 648), the court “held that parent’s claim that prohibiting him from entering school property without a hearing violated due process.”
    • McNett v. Jefferson-Morgan Sch. Dist., 2:21-cv-01064-RJC, 12 (W.D. Pa. Nov. 23, 2021)established that plaintiffs have a due process claim on the basis that a school board defendant had violated their due process rights by banning the parents from a public school without a hearing and by refusing to accept a petition for a hearing. Again, no due process will be incorporated if HB 5020 is passed as written.
• Restricting persons from school property.
  • “School officials have the authority to control students and school personnel on school property, and also have the authority and responsibility for assuring that parents and third parties conduct themselves appropriately while on school property.” Lovern v. Edwards, 190 F.3d 648, 655 (4th Cir. 1999) (citing Carey v. Brown, 447 U.S. 455, 470-71 (1980); Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565, 582-83 (1975)).
  • “School officials are well within constitutional bounds in limiting access to school property where it is necessary to maintain tranquility.” Cunningham v. Lenape Reg'l High Dist. Bd. of Educ., 492 F.Supp.2d 439, 448-49(D.N.J. 2007).
• Requiring parent-teacher conferences to be off-school property
  • It is restrictive and inclusive to registrants on the “sex offender registry” only, while allowing all other “Central Abuse Registry” registrants with misdemeanor or felony offenses constituting child abuse or neglect, free to have parent-teacher conferences on school property.
  • It is overbroad and includes all “sex offender registry” registrants regardless of whether said registrant has a conviction for a minor-related offense, so why would they need to be restricted from school property?
  • It’s unnecessarily burdensome and inconvenient for teachers.
• Considering the above, it’s clear that HB 5020, written as a blanket ban without justification, reasoning, and, most notably, due process, is or will be found unconstitutional if passed.

Hello

• Primary care shortage areas: West Virginia has 126 designated primary care HPSAs, with ~793,019 people living in designated shortage areas; only ~38.28% of need met, and 163 additional practitioners needed to remove the designations.  
• Mental health shortage areas: West Virginia has 124 mental health HPSAs, only ~5.68% of need met, and 94 practitioners needed to remove designations.  
• Rural hospital financial stress: 43% of rural hospitals in West Virginia operate on negative margins.  

• required language-access procedures for families (translation/interpreting standards),
• disability-specific behavioral safeguards (e.g., specific processes before exclusionary discipline for students with disabilities),
• clear due-process requirements tied to the new “trauma-informed” discipline approach.

• embeds “implicit bias” work inside a state policy landscape moving to eliminate DEI programs and trainings (SB 474),  
• delegates too much to later rulemaking,  
• lacks concrete, enforceable safeguards for disability-related behavior supports and language access.  

• “The term separation of church and state came from one letter by Thomas Jefferson to a congregation.” “The first amendment was to keep the government out of religion, not religion from government.” “The establishment clause was to keep from establishing a National Religion.” “States established their own religions prior to the constitution.” “Separation of church and state is a myth.”
  1. This is incorrect in many ways. Both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison both made countless statements about the need to keep the two entities separate. Whether using this term in full or not, the intent is clear
     1. Thomas Jefferson: “[E]very one must act according to the dictates of his own reason, and mine tells me that civil powers alone have been given to the President of the U.S. and no authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents.” To Rev. Samuel Miller, January 23, 1808
     2. Thomas Jefferson: “Our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions…therefore the proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to the offices of trust and emolument, unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion, is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages to which in common with his fellow citizens he has a natural right” -“Virginia Act for Establishing Religious Freedom” 1786

• Thomas Jefferson: “…yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as it was in his Almighty power to do; that the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavouring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world, and through all time; that to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical…” – “Virginia Act for Establishing Religious Freedom” 1786

1. Thomas Jefferson: “As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion” – Treaty of Tripoli Article 11 1797
2. James Madison: “[T]he number, the industry, and the morality of the Priesthood, & the devotion of the people have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the Church from the State." - Letter to Robert Walsh, March 2, 1819
3. James Madison: “The members of a Govt as such can in no sense, be regarded as possessing an advisory trust from their Constituents in their religious capacities.” – Journal Entry

• Thomas Jefferson wrote the “Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom” that formally severed ties between the state government of Virginia and the Church of England.
• James Madison wrote “Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments” in 1785, before he wrote the First Amendment, where he wrote in opposition to a proposal by Patrick Henry that all Virginians be taxed to support “teachers of the Christian religion.” To this day it is one of the most detailed writings against the government establishing of a state sponsored religion.

1. Thomas Jeferson and the infamous letter to Danbury Baptist: “...I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State" - Letter to Danbury Baptists Association 1802
   1. This has been used time and time again to express and confirm this founding father’s position on the Establishment Clause and the Free-Exercise Clause.
   2. This is the one many pastors and political leaders have been quoting saying that this is the origin of this concept of “separation of church and state.” However, it is not the first instance nor is it the only instance that this concept is discussed by our constitutional framers and founders.
2. There are more quotes from these two below in the link I provided as-well-as being easy to find online and other sources.

1. These men didn’t even believe that government should make any form of religious proclamations as well, like calling for national prayer. It could not be more clear.
2. States that had established, state sponsored religions slowly phased this out after adopting the United States Constitution, the last being Massachusetts in 1833.
3. What many historians gather from these men is that they believed that for Religion and Government to both flourish, they must do so on their own. That religion is best suited without government influence, and that government is best suited without religious influence. Religion does inform us, but it should not dictate.

• “The bible is the main inspiration of our founding documents.”
  1. This is not true, while the Bible informed many of our founding fathers in their basis of morality, they sought many secular sources to inform how they wanted our nation to be setup from our founding documents. Including: the Magna Carta, English Bill of Rights, English Common Law (stemming from Anglo-Saxon principles and ideas that predate Christianized Anglo-Saxon Groups).
  2. The First Amendment, penned by James Madison took inspiration from Thomas Jefferson’s “Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom” which was penned to end the state of Virginia’s state sponsored religious ties to the Church of England, in 1786. It established that no individual could be forced to attend or support any religious institution or suffer penalties for their beliefs. This is a clear indication to Thomas Jefferson’s intent to keep states themselves from establishing a religion within their own state.
• “The ten commandments informed our Bill of Rights and is as foundational as the constitution.” “The Ten Commandments influenced our laws.”
  1. The only similarity here is that there are ten amendments within the Bill of Rights and ten commandments. There is no historic proof that there is any inter-relation there. Just look at them in order and read. “Thou shalt have no other g*ds before me, does not inspire the Establishment or Free Exercise Clause, they are antithetical.
  2. The only commandments we see that are similar to laws that we have are to not kill or steal. There are no laws against children talking back to their parents, being jealous of your neighbors, lying (under most circumstances), or adultery (those phased out). To not kill and to not steal are two very common moral standings of most cultures – regardless of religion.
• “The Bible is the foundation of Western Civilization.”
  1. Rome was founded in 753 B.C. Western civilization was well established before the Christian Bible as we know it was formed in the 5^th Century AD. There were groups and civilizations where influences are still seen today that were not Christianized until much later.
• “The Aitken Bible teaches us a lot about the history of our nation and events during the Revolutionary War.”
  1. The website for The First American Bible, the group that will be providing these $200 Bibles, paid for by donations to them, offers only one lesson plan. That lesson plan is divided into three topics, and only one discusses the Aitken Bible.
  2. The Aitken Bible only has a few paragraphs discussing these events and how it came to be.
  3. The Aitken Bible lost money during production and Congress did not seek to fund it, few copies were made because it was not being purchased.
  4. Senator Bartlett claimed that it could teach students about printing methods at the time, the edition being given is not a replica. It is printed using modern production techniques.
• “This is for educational purposes only, not religious.”
  1. Opinion/Observation: if it was for educational purposes, why are we not also championing the supply of our foundational documents to the same classrooms? The organization behind the bibles “First American Bible” only supply one lesson plan on this specific Bible, yet it cost $200 for one lesson? The notion appears, to me, to be to slowly introduce religion in the classroom and into state government. Going against the very wishes of the men who originated our Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Senator Grady went on to list content standards on the Revolutionary period, including “contributions by western Virginia” to demonstrate how this specific bible could be used to align with state standards. The Bible wasn’t even printed in western Virginia, most of the content standards she listed would apply very loosely.
  2. It is the 250^th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, why are these same lawmakers not trying to make, at least, this document available to teachers to use as supplement and a physical representation of the very document that made us the country that we are today?

This bill is idiotic.  I’m 1000% more concerned that the school provide an actual education.  Wv ranks where in education?  🙄

Vote no to Senate Bill 388. Spend your time elsewhere, on issues that will actually have a measurable effect on West Virginians. Requiring bibles in classrooms will do nothing for ensuring mountaineers have clean water, safe roads, access to reliable internet, access to good paying, career jobs, that public schools are properly funded, paying teachers what they deserve, for reducing the costs of childcare (did you know NM has free childcare for everyone in their state? Proves it can happen! Figure out what NM is doing!). Do something that is tangible for improving our lives! I couldn’t care less that my kids have access to a bible in a classroom. They have access to a bible at home which is where it should be. All I see in this bill, is that not only are teachers expected to be social workers, therapists, correctional officers, protect their students from mass shootings, pay for supplies for their students over and over again, but now they’re supposed to be preachers and priests as well? They’re supposed to answer questions about the Bible in their classroom? Well I’ll tell you, you can put whatever version of the Bible is closest to what you believe in the classrooms, but you can’t guarantee your child’s teacher is going to answer questions about it in the way you would. So maybe keep religion instruction where it’s meant to be and that’s in the home.

Members of the Legislature,

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this bill. I understand the intent to recognize the historical role of the Aitken Bible during the Revolutionary War and its place in early American history.

West Virginia’s Constitution requires the Legislature to provide a thorough and efficient system of free schools. Any law affecting public education should clearly support student learning, improve outcomes, and use limited resources wisely.

This bill does not meet that standard.

Requiring public schools to house religious material that cannot be purchased with public funds does not improve education in West Virginia. It does not raise test scores, improve reading skills, or increase student achievement. It does not create jobs or strengthen our workforce.

Our schools are already struggling to meet basic needs. Teachers and administrators regularly ask families and community members to donate supplies, books, and other resources. The Aitken Bibles required by this bill are costly, and requiring schools to obtain them through outside funding places yet another burden on communities that are already stretched thin.

The bill applies to fourth, eighth, and tenth grades based on when the American Revolution is taught. While the Revolution is discussed in those grades, it is important to note that eighth grade focuses on West Virginia history. The Revolutionary War is only briefly covered, and the limited time spent on it does not allow for the depth needed to make the historical connections this bill appears to expect.

This bill also includes no penalty for failing to comply. Without any enforcement, it functions more as a suggestion than a true requirement. That raises concerns about whether this legislation is meant to improve education or simply send a message to certain voters.

There is no clear evidence that this requirement would benefit students in any measurable way. At best, it risks becoming a display item that is rarely used.

There is no evidence or rationale demonstrating that this requirement will improve test scores, raise academic achievement, or meaningfully enhance historical understanding. In practice, it risks becoming nothing more than a decorative item on a bookshelf.

I respectfully urge you to focus your efforts on policies that clearly strengthen education and better serve West Virginia’s students.