I am writing to express my strong opposition and grave concern regarding any proposal to eliminate standardized testing in West Virginia’s public schools. While conversations about assessment reform are valid and necessary, removing standardized testing entirely would have devastating financial and educational consequences for our state.

Federal law, specifically the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), requires states to administer annual assessments in reading, math, and science as a condition of receiving federal education funding. If West Virginia were to eliminate these tests, we would immediately forfeit hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funds that support critical programs for students, including Title I services for low-income schools, special education supports, teacher development, and afterschool programs.

These funds are not optional or easily replaced. West Virginia’s state budget simply cannot absorb such a financial loss without catastrophic impacts on classrooms, staffing, and student services. The result would be larger class sizes, fewer resources, and diminished opportunities, especially for our most vulnerable students who rely most on federally supported programs.

While there is room for improvement in how assessments are designed and used, completely eliminating standardized testing is neither practical nor responsible. Instead, our focus should be on using assessment data more effectively in order to identify gaps, improve instruction, and ensure accountability while continuing to advocate for fairer, more meaningful ways to measure student learning.

I urge lawmakers to reject any proposal that jeopardizes our state’s compliance with federal education requirements. The long-term cost to our students and schools far outweighs any short-term political gain. West Virginia cannot afford to lose this essential funding or the educational safeguards that come with it.

I can understand why they have issues with standardized testing. Its major focus on math and reading doesn’t shine light on other categories like music and other arts. However, I wouldn’t totally get rid of standardized tests. These tests show, not only knowledge in math and English, but an ability to follow coursework and discipline. If a child is scoring in the 900s there is an issue. Therefore, although I agree with some, I wouldn’t abolish these tests.

I respectfully submit this comment in opposition to House Bill 4090.

While I recognize the intent to expand support services for students and families, HB 4090 raises significant constitutional, legal, and practical concerns when applied in a public school setting.

Public schools are state actors and must operate within the constraints of the First Amendment. Authorizing county boards of education to employ or accept volunteer chaplains (an inherently religious role) creates a substantial risk of violating the Establishment Clause by appearing to endorse religion or religious practice. This risk is heightened in schools, where students are minors and particularly vulnerable to perceived pressure or coercion from authority figures.

Even if participation is described as voluntary, courts have repeatedly held that subtle or indirect coercion in schools is constitutionally impermissible. A board-sanctioned chaplain operating within a school building may reasonably be perceived by students and families as representing the school’s approval of religion, or of particular religious beliefs, which public schools must avoid.

Additionally, the bill explicitly exempts chaplains from state certification and licensure requirements. This lack of standardized training and oversight raises serious concerns regarding religious neutrality, student rights, trauma-informed practices, and appropriate boundaries. Removing professional credentialing does not reduce risk, it increases it, both constitutionally and operationally.

The bill also provides no clear safeguards to ensure religious neutrality, denominational balance, or equal access for students who hold minority religious beliefs or no religious beliefs at all. Government entities may not favor one religion over another, nor religion over non-religion, and HB 4090 provides insufficient guardrails to prevent this outcome.

Finally, while the bill attempts to limit civil liability for chaplains, statutory immunity does not protect school districts from federal constitutional claims, litigation costs, or potential loss of federal funding. This legislation could place county boards in an untenable position, exposing them to legal challenges while offering little clarity on implementation or compliance.

West Virginia’s schools face urgent challenges related to academic outcomes, mental health, staffing shortages, and school safety. Any expansion of student support services should be clearly secular, professionally regulated, and constitutionally sound.

For these reasons, I urge the Legislature to reject House Bill 4090 or substantially revise it to ensure compliance with constitutional requirements and to protect students, families, and school districts.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide public comment.

Mariah Richards

I agree with this bill as cameras in classrooms could ensure the safety of students as well as staff. accusations could be authenticated meanwhile deterring the acts of bullying, vandalism, theft, disruptions, and more. Classrooms would be held to more accountability, making the environment comfortable for work and learning. The safety of all individuals should be of priority, even in classrooms. The transition to this would be smooth, as there are already cameras in hallways, stairwells, outside the building, etc.

There are existing issues with the Special Education camera law that this was copied from. Legislation will be presented to change that law very soon and I would urge that this not be passed as it is currently written.

As a West Virginia constituent in Beckley, Raleigh County, I support HB 4449.

In too many communities, vulnerable students and the staff trying to protect them can get trapped in systems where harm is minimized, buried, or handled through relationships and politics rather than transparent accountability. When there is a credible allegation of bullying, abuse, neglect, or misconduct, families deserve a process that does not rely only on competing narratives and closed-door decision-making.

This bill offers a practical tool: documentation. Recordings can reduce coverups, deter misconduct, and make it harder for “good old boy” networks to protect bad behavior. When something serious happens, evidence can help investigations move faster and more fairly, and it can protect both students and employees from false accusations.

I also appreciate that the bill includes guardrails like confidentiality requirements and limits on using recordings for teacher evaluations. Used properly, this is not about punishing educators. It is about safety, accountability, and clarity when an incident is alleged.

Please vote to pass HB 4449 and continue strengthening oversight so that recordings support real protection for students and staff, not institutional self-protection.

I feel like if there were cameras in the classrooms, it would be a good thing, so that if there was fhights, you can see who started it and get the best opinion on who is in the wrong. I feel like if there is camras in t eh class rooms, it would help subs and teachers if there are a lot of disruptions in the class, or like if there if there is a old sub or teachere who needs some help with kids who are being disrespecful then you are abel too look back at the camras and see who whos doing stuff to mess with people or who is disrupting the class. I feel like it would help the teachers give the right punishment to the people who are doing bad stuff in the classrooms, and if the teachers leave the room and nobody is in the room, you need somebody in there to make sure nobody is doing stuff when the teacher is not in the room.

I work for Berkeley County Schools and support House Bill 4467.

During a pregnancy, I experienced medical complications that required early labor intervention and doctor-ordered bed rest. At that time, I had already used much of my available leave for family medical needs. When I needed leave for my own pregnancy-related medical care, I had no remaining days and was forced to go unpaid.

A coworker attempted to donate sick leave to me, but the request was denied because my pregnancy complication did not fall within the limited conditions allowed under existing policy. Although the leave was medically necessary, it was excluded due to narrow definitions.

This bill would address that gap by clearly allowing pregnant employees and mothers of newborns to access the sick leave bank for maternity-related needs. Pregnancy complications do not always fit into a rigid list, and employees should not be penalized for that.

I urge you to support House Bill 4467 to ensure fair and consistent treatment of school employees during pregnancy and childbirth.

I support the intent to support pregnant employees and new mothers. However, HB 4467 misunderstands how sick leave banks actually work.

Sick leave banks are funded by employees voluntarily contributing their own sick days, often with additional automatic deductions from all participants when the bank balance drops. Maternity leave commonly lasts six weeks or more. Allowing extended maternity leave to draw from the sick bank will quickly drain balances and trigger repeated deductions from employees who may never use the bank themselves.

This will discourage participation, weaken the sick leave bank, and jeopardize its availability for true catastrophic medical events. The bill does not create maternity leave, it shifts the cost onto other employees’ personal sick leave.

If the Legislature wants to support working parents, it should pursue a dedicated parental leave solution rather than destabilizing the sick leave bank.

Respectfully, this bill needs revision before passage.

Mariah Richards

I am the mother of a female high school senior on the wrestling team in Gilmer County. She is the sole female athlete on the team and has been wrestling since her Freshman year. While this bill will not benefit her before graduation, I feel that it is important for me to share this information with you all for future girls with her determination.

With the growing recognition of women in wrestling, West Virginia has the opportunity to be at the forefront of supporting female athletes, creating a space for them to shine and grow. Female wrestling in West Virginia offers a variety of benefits for participants and the broader community. Here are some key advantages:

1. Empowerment & Confidence Building

• Wrestling helps females build self-esteem and confidence by pushing physical and mental boundaries. The sport encourages perseverance, resilience, and the ability to overcome challenges, which are crucial life skills. My daughter has become a stronger athlete mentally since beginning her wrestling career. She sees that success comes from her strength and her perseverence rather than just from a team.

2. Physical Fitness & Health

• Wrestling is an intense full-body workout that improves strength, flexibility, cardiovascular health, and coordination. It encourages healthy habits and discipline, as athletes need to maintain fitness for competition. This has peaked my daughter's interest in the athletic training career field and is shaping the professional she will become after graduation.

3. Equality in Sports

• As female wrestling continues to grow, it offers an important platform for gender equality in sports. By having more opportunities for women to compete at a high level, it challenges traditional gender roles and promotes inclusivity.

4. Scholarship Opportunities

• Female athletes in wrestling may gain access to college scholarships, which can help further their education and future careers. Many WV colleges and universities, or nearby states, are expanding opportunities for female athletes in wrestling, and some even offer full-ride scholarships for top competitors. This is a huge opportunity for our youth, however not having full support from the state and WVSSAC will prohibit girls from rising to their full potentional and having access to those scholarships.

5. Community Engagement

• Women's sports help bring people together. As female wrestling grows in WV, it can create a sense of community, where families, friends, and local supporters rally around the athletes. This fosters stronger local ties and promotes support for women in sports.

6. Improved Mental Toughness

• Wrestling is not only physically demanding but also mentally challenging. Athletes must strategize, stay focused under pressure, and keep a positive mindset even when faced with adversity. These mental skills can be applied to many areas of life. My daughter has learned to have a better attitude both on and off of the mat because she is the one facing scrutiny, not a team of people. She has learned that it is tough to lose but how to remain humble and support her other female opponents.

7. Role Models for Future Generations

• As more women enter the wrestling world, they can become role models for young girls in the state who may not have considered wrestling as an option. Seeing strong, successful women in wrestling can inspire the next generation to pursue their own passions, regardless of gender.

8. Increased Interest in Women's Sports

• Female wrestling in West Virginia can contribute to a broader cultural shift toward recognizing and celebrating women's sports. This can lead to better media coverage, more sponsorships, and increased visibility for women athletes, not just in wrestling but in other sports as well.

9. Teamwork and Social Skills

• Even though wrestling is an individual sport, it often involves training in teams, where athletes learn to work together, motivate one another, and build camaraderie. This fosters strong interpersonal relationships and the ability to collaborate.

10. Breaking Stereotypes

• Wrestling is often seen as a male-dominated sport, so when women break through in this area, it challenges outdated gender norms. Female wrestlers show that women can excel in any sport and that strength, toughness, and athleticism aren’t defined by gender.

WV has seen the rise of more local and state-level competitions specifically for female wrestlers. The West Virginia State Wrestling Tournament now includes female divisions, providing athletes with a platform to showcase their talent and compete for state titles. This is an important milestone for the sport, as it validates the hard work and dedication of female athletes, my daughter included, and gives them a chance to compete at the highest level in their state.

We would hope that you would consider passing this bill and celebrating the accomplishments of female wrestlers across the state. Wrestling is not a sport specifically for boys just as cheer or volleyball is not solely for females. We hope to see this assist girls in West Virginia to knowing that they are stronger than they think and that they can do anything that they put thier minds to!

This is yet another ridiculous bill from the out of touch politicians in Charleston, and frankly, it makes no sense. The level of misplaced confidence required to propose this is staggering. It is incredible that a state which consistently ranks at the bottom or second to last in education every time a report is released feels qualified to tell homeschoolers how to do their job. Homeschooling isn't an easy out and it would be what the parent should be doing in that case to take responsibility for their children and save the state money on services that the parent obviously is not interested in.

​We should be encouraging parents to step up and homeschool if they and their children find that public schools aren't meeting their needs. It is no secret that public schools involve a significant amount of wasted time. Many students find they can stay focused at home and complete their studies in a fraction of the time.

​By passing this legislation, we are simply forcing more families into a system that already lacks the resources to properly support them. When a parent chooses to take responsibility for their child’s education because the traditional system isn't working, that should be welcomed, not punished.

​By the time the few people making these laws realize the damage they are doing, there won't be anyone left in the state to pay the taxes that fund their salaries. Passing this sends a clear message: every person who has already moved away was right to leave. This isn't about education; it is a petty, mean-spirited attack on the homeschooling community and parents' rights.

• This bill is based on a FALSE PREMISE that ALL families who file an NIO to homeschool while involved in a truancy process are simply looking for an “easy out”, and the bill omits safeguards for the students who have a LEGITIMATE NEED to exit a public school system in an immediate timeframe.
• There can be compelling reasons for a student’s absence from school: severe bullying, personal conflict or bullying from a teacher, mental health issues, etc.  Assuming they are looking for an “easy out” and requiring such a student to keep attending school could indeed cause harm to the child.
• According to the National Household Education Survey, the number one reason parents choose to homeschool is concern about school environment, including classroom safety, drugs, bullying, or negative peer pressure. In other words, for their children’s safety. Unfortunately, the threat of injury is not an excuse for missing school under West Virginia law.
• Lacking reasonable safeguards for such situations, this bill essentially prohibits well intended parents from acting in the best interest of their child.

• The existing law provides a mechanism for superintendents to seek to deny the homeschooling option by filing a petition in court. This is the best solution for whatever problem exists. It maintains due process, enables parents to act in the best interest of the child, and gives superintendents a directive to act whenever the parent is not acting in the best interest of the child.
• Rather than using the existing authority and maintaining due process, this bill creates an “easy out” for the school system by enacting a blanket prohibition that has a high likelihood of negative impact on some children’s well-being.
• Even if a majority of truants did not have legitimate reasons to withdraw to homeschool, some students do have a very real need to leave the school system quickly. Provisions must be made to preserve their well-being, too!

• There is no mention or impact on Hope students, microschools, etc.

• It doesn’t define when the “pre-petition process” begins. It is possible that this process could start as soon as the student has three unexcused absences.  The bill is susceptible to subjective and inconsistent application, i.e. overreach and misuse.
• The factual findings in the bill are neither "factual" nor "findings"--they're negative assumptions about homeschoolers without any citation to objective evidence supporting the need for the legislation in the first place.  The “findings” seem based on negative assumptions about homeschooling rather than objective facts.
• Finding (2) is not at all germane to the bill’s stated purpose or the provisions to be enacted in section (b). Rather it seems placed there to simply cast aspersion toward homeschoolers, generally.

• The directive for the Department of Education to survey families who leave the public school to homeschool is not germane to the stated purpose of the bill.  Further, the survey again only targets one group of non-public school alternatives (homeschooling, and no others).  Once again, this raises equal protection concerns regarding the constitutionality of the directive.
• The language for the survey is broad and invites the State to invade the privacy of families. If the goal of a survey is to collect accurate data that can be used to better identify the drivers of the decision to file an NOI to homeschool, that research is already available.
  • COE - Homeschooled Children and Reasons for Homeschooling by the National Center for Educational Statistics.
  • How many US students are homeschooled, and for what reasons? | Pew Research Center

• This bill is based on a FALSE PREMISE that ALL families who file an NIO to homeschool while involved in a truancy process are simply looking for an “easy out”, and the bill omits safeguards for the students who have a LEGITIMATE NEED to exit a public school system in an immediate timeframe.
• There can be compelling reasons for a student’s absence from school: severe bullying, personal conflict or bullying from a teacher, mental health issues, etc.  Assuming they are looking for an “easy out” and requiring such a student to keep attending school could indeed cause harm to the child.
• According to the National Household Education Survey, the number one reason parents choose to homeschool is concern about school environment, including classroom safety, drugs, bullying, or negative peer pressure. In other words, for their children’s safety. Unfortunately, the threat of injury is not an excuse for missing school under West Virginia law.
• Lacking reasonable safeguards for such situations, this bill essentially prohibits well intended parents from acting in the best interest of their child.

• The existing law provides a mechanism for superintendents to seek to deny the homeschooling option by filing a petition in court. This is the best solution for whatever problem exists. It maintains due process, enables parents to act in the best interest of the child, and gives superintendents a directive to act whenever the parent is not acting in the best interest of the child.
• Rather than using the existing authority and maintaining due process, this bill creates an “easy out” for the school system by enacting a blanket prohibition that has a high likelihood of negative impact on some children’s well-being.
• Even if a majority of truants did not have legitimate reasons to withdraw to homeschool, some students do have a very real need to leave the school system quickly. Provisions must be made to preserve their well-being, too!

• There is no mention or impact on Hope students, microschools, etc.

• It doesn’t define when the “pre-petition process” begins. It is possible that this process could start as soon as the student has three unexcused absences.  The bill is susceptible to subjective and inconsistent application, i.e. overreach and misuse.
• The factual findings in the bill are neither "factual" nor "findings"--they're negative assumptions about homeschoolers without any citation to objective evidence supporting the need for the legislation in the first place.  The “findings” seem based on negative assumptions about homeschooling rather than objective facts.
• Finding (2) is not at all germane to the bill’s stated purpose or the provisions to be enacted in section (b). Rather it seems placed there to simply cast aspersion toward homeschoolers, generally.

• The directive for the Department of Education to survey families who leave the public school to homeschool is not germane to the stated purpose of the bill.  Further, the survey again only targets one group of non-public school alternatives (homeschooling, and no others).  Once again, this raises equal protection concerns regarding the constitutionality of the directive.
• The language for the survey is broad and invites the State to invade the privacy of families. If the goal of a survey is to collect accurate data that can be used to better identify the drivers of the decision to file an NOI to homeschool, that research is already available.
  • COE - Homeschooled Children and Reasons for Homeschooling by the National Center for Educational Statistics.
  • How many US students are homeschooled, and for what reasons? | Pew Research Center

I have not personally had to deal with leaving the public school system, as we have always homeschooled. However, I have so many friends with kids in the public school system, some of those friends have kids who are being bullied. They have spoken to the schools about it, with nothing being done to the bullies and no resolution to the issue. This has caused serious mental health issues. I have one friend, whose child become suicidal due to the bullying. With this bill, If they had decided to pull out of public school to homeschool, that would've been denied. This is not okay, there are legitimate reasons to pull out of public to homeschool quickly. It is NOT safe to ASSUME that everyone who has truancy issues is just trying to get an out. I do not believe in my heart that passing this would be going in the right direction. I do feel like this is only trying to discourage parents from doing what is best for their children.

I am writing to ask that you oppose HB 5053. I am concerned that this bill places excessive power in the hands of county superintendents, allowing them to potentially force children to remain in systems that are detrimental to their well-being.   Furthermore, parents should not be required to justify their decision to homeschool. The bill is vague regarding the steps that could be taken against parents who choose this path. Current laws already allow superintendents to obtain court orders to delay homeschooling for students who may be in danger; superintendents should not act as both judge and jury in a parent's decision.   I urge you to oppose this bill, as it represents significant government overreach.  

This bill is governmental overreach. This is in no way protecting the rights of kids and parents. It places unnecessary power into the hands of BOE members and other state officials who clearly aren’t handling their duties well with public school students

WITHDRAW THE BILL. Decisions for our children are OUR right. Our children’s education is our right. We are the sole decision makers on a day to day basis, education is no different. School systems should never have the right nor the authority, even if it includes involving other entities to obtain said authority, to make such decisions on behalf of what we as parents decide. Government, State, nor anyone else for that matter, besides the parent should never have authority. Especially when the true baseline of their decision is affected by money and numbers. Grants and funding are issued based upon the “numbers” that are submitted. Public school systems are dropping those numbers daily and it affects their money. Never let the money blur the lines of any child’s wellbeing. This does exactly that. And it is not welcomed. Our children deserve better. They deserve the best that we as parents can provide. Public schools are not the best. That is clear and is supported by the lack of education in this state in comparison to the entire country. It’s supported by the bullying that goes on daily with little to nothing done. The statement “bullying is not tolerated” does nothing. Meaningless promises and words but no action. Only when it benefits the numbers AKA ..MONEY. This was not meant to be a formal style comment. This is a nicely put, straight to the facts comment. WITHDRAW THE BILL.

I respectfully urge lawmakers to reconsider this bill’s approach to imposing additional oversight measures on homeschool families, particularly provisions aimed at verifying educational quality through government review of coursework, core subject performance, or concerns about so-called “manufactured grades.”

While ensuring that children receive a meaningful education is a goal everyone shares, this proposal risks creating broad, burdensome regulation based on the assumption that families cannot be trusted to educate their own children without intensive monitoring. The overwhelming majority of homeschool parents are deeply invested in their children’s academic growth and often exceed standard expectations through individualized instruction, flexible pacing, and real-world learning opportunities that do not always fit neatly into traditional grading systems.

A central concern is that this bill appears to equate educational quality with conventional grading and standardized structures. Homeschool education often uses alternative assessment methods such as portfolios, mastery-based progression, project-based learning, dual enrollment, apprenticeships, and online coursework. These approaches can be academically rigorous while looking very different from a public school report card. Labeling nontraditional evaluations as potentially “manufactured” risks misunderstanding legitimate educational models and penalizing innovation.

There is also the issue of government overreach into the home. Increased documentation requirements, grade audits, or subjective reviews of curriculum could place families under constant scrutiny without clear evidence that such measures improve student outcomes. This may create stress and administrative burden for compliant families while diverting state resources away from students who are truly struggling and in need of support.

Policies built on suspicion rather than partnership can damage trust between families and the state. Instead of presuming poor quality, lawmakers could focus on accessible resources, optional academic support, and clear, reasonable pathways for demonstrating progress that respect the diversity of homeschool methods.

Most importantly, educational policy should remain student-centered. A one-size-fits-all accountability model may unintentionally limit flexible learning environments that help many children thrive — including students with learning differences, medical needs, mental health challenges, or those who simply learn best outside a traditional classroom structure.

For these reasons, I encourage a more balanced approach that protects educational freedom while offering support where it is truly needed, rather than expanding regulatory control over families who are already working hard to provide strong, individualized educations.

I oppose this bill and urge a No vote on this bill for these and many other reasons.

The bill is based on a false premise. For their own well-being, many students (some of which may have had several absences) NEED to leave the public school system quickly.

• This bill is based on a FALSE PREMISE that ALL families who file an NOI to homeschool while involved in a truancy process are simply looking for an “easy out”, and it omits safeguards for the students who have a LEGITIMATE NEED to exit a public school system in an immediate timeframe.
• There can be compelling reasons for a student’s absence from school: severe bullying, personal conflict or bullying from a teacher, mental health issues, etc.  Assuming they are looking for an “easy out” and requiring such students to keep attending school could indeed cause harm to them.
• According to the National Household Education Survey, the number one reason parents choose to homeschool is concern about school environment including classroom safety, drugs, bullying, or negative peer pressure. In other words, they withdraw from public school for their children’s safety. Unfortunately, the threat of injury is not an excuse for missing school under West Virginia law.
• Lacking reasonable safeguards for such situations, this bill essentially prohibits well intended parents from acting in the best interest of their child.

Existing law already provides the best solution.

• The existing law provides a mechanism for superintendents to seek to deny the homeschooling option by filing a petition in court. This is the best solution for whatever problem exists. It maintains due process, enables parents to act in the best interest of the child, and gives superintendents a directive to act whenever the parent is not acting in the best interest of the child.
• Rather than using the existing authority and maintaining due process, this bill creates an “easy out” for the school system by enacting a blanket prohibition that has a high likelihood of negative impact on some children’s well-being.
• Even if a majority of truants did not have legitimate reasons to withdraw to homeschool, some students do have a very real need to leave the school system quickly. Provisions must be made to preserve their well-being!

The bill raises equal protection concernsby unfairly targeting a single category of public school alternatives – those seeking to homeschool.

• There is no mention of, or impact on, students schooling under other exemptions, like Hope or microschools.

The bill is poorly written:

• It doesn’t define when the “pre-petition process” begins. It is possible that this process could start as soon as the student has three unexcused absences. The bill is susceptible to subjective and inconsistent application, i.e. overreach and misuse.
• The factual findings in the bill are neither “factual” nor “findings.” They are merelynegative assumptions about homeschooling without citations to objective evidence to support the need for the legislation in the first place. The “findings” seem based on negative assumptions rather than objective facts.
• Finding (2) is not at all germane to the bill’s stated purpose or the provisions to be enacted in section (b). Rather it seems placed there to simply cast aspersion toward homeschoolers, generally.
• The directive for the Department of Education to survey families who leave the public school to homeschool is not germane to the stated purpose of the bill.  Further, the survey again only targets one group of non-public school alternatives (homeschooling, and no others). Once again, this raises equal protection concerns regarding the constitutionality of the directive.
• The language for the survey is broad and invites the State to invade the privacy of families. If the goal of a survey is to collect accurate data that can be used to better identify the drivers of the decision to file an NOI to homeschool, that research is currently available.
  • • COE – Homeschooled Children and Reasons for Homeschooling by the National Center for Educational Statistics
    • How many US students are homeschooled, and for what reasons?| Pew Research Center

As a former homeschooling parent and a licensed psychologist, I strongly support this bill. While homeschooling can be a positive and effective educational choice for many families, I have also witnessed situations where it has been misused — sometimes to avoid truancy accountability, to lower expectations for children, or to circumvent involvement from schools and child protective services. Recent tragedies here in West Virginia have only deepened my belief that thoughtful oversight is necessary to help protect vulnerable children. Reasonable safeguards are not about limiting parental rights; they are about ensuring that every child is safe, supported, and given a real opportunity to succeed. This is not a criticism of responsible homeschooling families who are deeply committed to their children’s education and well-being. Rather, it is an acknowledgment that without appropriate structure and accountability, some children can fall through the cracks. I support stronger protections because the well-being of children must come first.