By BOB GRIFFIN

I’ve been following the twisting path of education legislation this year in Juneau. Education seems to dominate the conversation every year, as lawmakers fervently search for a compromise that manages to annoy both sides equally. This year is no different.

House Bill 57, recently passed by the Senate, now appears to be the leading “education bill” of this legislative session and a textbook example of the “annoy everyone” approach.

Democrats are unhappy because their original demand was for a 30% increase in formula funding with no strings attached.

Republicans are equally displeased. Their initial position called for little to no increase in formula funding, preferring instead targeted investments in reforms proven to yield results in other states.

The compromise? HB 57 delivers a modest 12% increase in formula funding but is light on meaningful reform. In other words, everyone’s unhappy.

We have a divided government. Democrats narrowly control both the Senate and the House. The Republicans’ only real leverage is the Governor’s veto pen — an extremely powerful tool given the slim majorities in both chambers.

While the veto can help Republicans win some battles, overusing it carries long-term strategic risks.

Unfortunately, the nuances of the Republican position are difficult to explain in the kind of bumper-sticker sound bites that seem to resonate most with low-information swing voters — the very people who will determine the future makeup of our state government.

Republicans face a tougher messaging challenge. They must counter the simplistic and widespread belief that more money automatically equals better outcomes in education.

I’ve tried to make it clear over the years that there is no consistent correlation between increased K–12 spending and improved student performance. Sadly, most voters aren’t as well-informed as the regular readers of this column.

I, too, am disappointed in HB 57, although it isn’t entirely without merit. One positive: it incentivizes early reading by rewarding schools for students who are at grade level or showing improvement in reading through grade six.

However, the bill does little to address the core problem in Alaska’s education system: the lack of meaningful competition for the existing education monopoly.

At this point, time is likely running out to sway the outcome of this session from “good enough” to “could be better.”

Should the current agreement fall apart, it would empower the “burn it all down” faction that’s pushing for a “no agreement” end to the session. That outcome wouldn’t just harm our kids, it would also complicate Republican messaging in the next election, particularly with swing voters drawn to simplistic narratives.

The most successful education reform efforts in the country have come from states with strong Republican majorities. I’d love to see those reforms in Alaska. But to borrow a phrase from President Trump: Right now, “we don’t have the cards.”

If the few reforms we’ve managed to pass in recent years begin to show real results, perhaps we’ll be better positioned to build the majorities needed for major change.

Bob Griffin is on the board of Alaska Policy Forum and served on the Alaska Board of Education and Early Development.