I’m writing to express my disapproval of Representative Drew Darby’s support for Senate Bill 2, a decision that marks a clear shift from the promises he made just months ago.
While Rep. Darby claims to have stayed in the fight for rural schools, his vote in favor of SB2—despite its devastating implications for public education—signals a troubling departure from the convictions he campaigned on.
Last fall, Rep. Darby stood firm, saying, “This is about vouchers. This is about public dollars going into private and parochial hands without any accountability, transparency, or open enrollment policy.” He also wrote, “Since you elected me as your state representative, I have sworn a duty… to protect public education [and] the separation of public and private institutions.”
Now, under pressure, he says “the bill would pass with or without our support”—a rationale that doesn’t align with the leadership and resolve he once promised.
In his recent Facebook post, Rep. Darby details several amendments he and other rural Republicans negotiated to “lessen the harm” of SB2. Among them are annual audits, caps on eligibility for certain families, and bans on pop-up private schools.
But let’s be clear: these are marginal safeguards for a bill whose core function still diverts desperately needed public funds into unaccountable private programs.
He also touts that the voucher program will require funding approval every two years—essentially kicking the can down the road and placing trust in future legislatures to do what he wouldn’t do now: say no.
These amendments may slightly dull the blade, but they don’t stop the bleeding. Once the door to vouchers is open, it’s only a matter of time before it swings wider.
Rep. Darby suggests his vote was necessary to preserve political capital and protect other priorities like rural healthcare, broadband access, and water infrastructure. But no other legislation he has authored or co-authored this session—including HB 3794 (healthcare access via nurse practitioners) or HB 5568 (geothermal energy development)—comes close to the broad, long-term impact that SB2 will have on our public schools.
Trading the stability of our education system for temporary political leverage is a dangerous bargain.
Many of us supported Rep. Darby because he stood against vouchers. Now he has shifted, not because his constituents changed, but because the political winds did. That’s not courage—that’s calculation.
I urge Rep. Darby to remember who he said he was—and who we need him to be. Our public schools, our teachers, and our children deserve more than conditional protection. They deserve real leadership.
Sincerely,
Nicholas Hill
